|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions >> Z & Ors v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Ors (Judgment 2)  EWHC 1371 (Fam) (21 May 2013)
Cite as:  EWHC 1371 (Fam)
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
| Mr Z
- and -
News Group Newspapers Limited
Miss Clare Kissin (instructed by Simons Muirhead Burton) for the NGN Ltd
Mr. Anthony Hudson (instructed by the CPS) for the CPS
Hearing dates: 20 & 21 May 2013
Crown Copyright ©
Mr. Justice Cobb :
"Editors must not use the fame, notoriety or position of a parent or guardian as sole justification for publishing details of a child's private life"
And in relation to the reporting of criminal process (per §9), importantly:
"Relatives or friends of persons convicted or accused of crime should not generally be identified without their consent, unless they are genuinely relevant to the story.
Particular regard should be paid to the potentially vulnerable position of children who witness, or are victims of, crime. This should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings."
"the identity of those convicted and sentenced for criminal offences should not be concealed. Uncomfortable though it may frequently be for the defendant that is a normal consequence of his crime."
i) There shall be no publication or broadcasting of the forenames of the children, including the adult children, so as to protect, as far as I am able, some cherished rights to privacy; this applies particularly for the child E, and to a lesser extent D and F, but in view of my intention to reduce identification and unwarranted intrusion into family life for their sake and generally, the other children too;
ii) For the same reason, there shall be no reporting of any picture being or including a picture of either the children, the adult children, or the Applicant Mr Z;
iii) Given that the Applicant, Mr Z, is likely to be assuming the care of the younger children in the event that Mrs Z receives a custodial sentence, there shall be no reporting of his forename, consistent with my desire to respect so far as is possible some Article 8 privacy for the children;
iv) There shall be no reporting of any medical conditions or disabilities which the children (whether adult or minor) are said to suffer other than those conditions or disabilities which were said to have been reported by Mrs Z in the context of her claims for benefit; for the avoidance of doubt, there shall be no public reporting of the contents of the recent CAMHS letter concerning child E;
v) There can be identification of the Crown Court (and the trial Judge) at which the trial has taken place, and the County in which the family live. No more specific information relevant to the address or location of the family is justified;
vi) There will be no restriction on reporting of the fact that the children concerned are a sibling group of eight. In reaching my conclusion on this aspect, which I found less easy than other aspects to resolve, I took the view that this information did not of itself materially add to the identification of the family in such a way as to interfere with their Article 8 rights, given the general availability of other information which will be available in accordance with my order.
Revision to the current Reporting Restriction Order
28. I emphasise that the revisions to the Reporting Restriction Order discussed above only apply in the event that Mrs Z is convicted of any of the counts on the indictment.
29. If any party, or representative of the press, should seek any further clarification, they should seek my guidance as a matter of urgency.
30. I shall separately receive representations from counsel as to the reporting of this judgment and the judgment delivered on 7 May 2013  EWHC 1150.