Family legal advice articles

Foreign divorces - Better protection for spouses
9 July 2010

Husband's covert affair means Wife keeps house
6 July 2010

"It's been in the family for years" is no argument
5 July 2010

Wedding video stops divorce
2 July 2010

Time doesn't run out for maintenance penalty
1 July 2010

No Appeal for Unsupported Claim by Cohabitee
25 June 2010

Letting the media into family courts | What it means in reality

25 June 2009



When Justice Secretary Jack Straw decreed that from April 27, family courts were to be opened up to journalists, some couples were concerned they could find their own private lives in the media spotlight.

They were worried that, like celebrities who split in the glare of publicity, financial and access arrangements for their children could become daily fodder for the national or local press.

The reality though, says Sue Andrews, partner and family law practice group leader at Thames Valley law firm B P Collins, is that the limitations on what can be reported means that very few journalists are actually taking up their right to attend.

"Based on our experience, and that of colleagues who also practice in this area of family law on a regular basis, there has not been a flurry of press at the courts," she said. "That is perhaps hardly surprising since the limitations on what can be reported, mean that such reports are unlikely to be of great interest to the general news reading public."

As well as deciding on issues such as custody or contact where parents are divorcing; and how finances should be split, courts make far-reaching decisions around whether or not children should be taken into care or put up for adoption.

Before the new ruling, with some exceptions, neither the public nor the media had been allowed in to protect families – particularly children – from intrusion into their privacy.

However this had led to claims that the secrecy of the hearings had led to injustices, for instance children taken wrongly into care or fathers being discriminated against.

When Jack Straw announced the opening up of the courts to accredited journalists in England and Wales, he said it was part of a step towards a new culture of "greater openness" in all courts.

"There was increasing public concern about what was seen as the secrecy of the family courts and of family judges handing down judgments which were difficult to challenge," continued Sue, who is a member of Resolution, an organisation of family lawyers committed to the constructive resolution of family disputes.

"Pressure was therefore brought to make the proceedings more transparent, so that the public would be aware of what takes place in family proceedings."

The new rules, she explained, do not give the media unfettered access to family courts, for example, they cannot attend adoption proceedings or conciliation or financial dispute resolution hearings.

They can also be excluded from other proceedings at the discretion of the judge. It is likely that such matters will be dealt with "as and when they arise", although where it is known in advance that the media are likely to attend, an objection could be raised and dealt with beforehand.

In these cases however, the onus will be on the person seeking to exclude the press, to show why there would be an injustice if they did attend, and the court has published practical guidance which shows very clearly it will take a robust line in respect of such applications, and be slow to exclude the media.

Exclusion orders can also be made where necessary, for the orderly conduct of the proceedings; where justice would be impeded or prejudiced or where there may be physical or health risks if the press do attend.

For example, this may be if price sensitive information is to be disclosed; or if a court considers that there is a significant risk that a witness would not give full or frank evidence in the presence of the press.

Sue continued: “The purpose of enabling media attendance is to create confidence in the system by fostering openness about the procedure and outcome, but while still protecting the privacy of those involved. Any reporting must be sensitive and anonymous so that those involved cannot be identified, particularly any children involved both during and after the conclusion of the case.

"Even if the media do attend, although they can report on procedure, legal points and the outcome, they cannot report on what occurred during the proceedings nor any information or evidence disclosed in documents or orally unless the court gave express permission.

"And where children are concerned the rules are even tighter to prevent any details being published which might identify the child as the subject of court proceedings.

"While it is quite understandable that if you are engaged in proceedings with a former partner it is likely to be daunting to think the press may attend, our experience is that the media have been slow to take up these new rights of access and are rarely in attendance.”

If you would like to speak to one of B P Collins' experts in family law, please call 01753 279045, complete the online enquiry form or email familylaw@bpcollins.co.uk.