Family Law Hub

Judgment, published: 30/12/2001

Items referring to this

• CA v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and EG (CSM) (Child support - tribunal practice) [2017] UKUT 9 (AAC)
  Circumstances when an anonymity order should be granted in child support decisions Judgment, 22/03/2017, free
• DE v AB [2014] EWCA Civ 1064
  Father was seeking an order that the oral permission hearing pursued by the Appellant mother shall take place in private. The judge ruled that proceedings be held in public but subject to immediate and continuing publicity protections so as to prevent withheld and prohibited information from being disclosed into the public domain without the permission of the court. There should also be anonymisation of the reporting of the identities of the parties and the child and any information likely to lead to the identification of the child. Judgment, 14/08/2014, free
• W v M (ToLATA Proceedings: Anonymity) [2012] EWHC 1679 (Fam)
  Judgment, 28/01/2013, free
• Y v Z [2014] EWHC 650 (Fam)
  In these Schedule 1 proceedings, mother wanted to be able to disclose to the Police and/or to the Crown Prosecution Service and the Financial Conduct Authority [FCA] the fact that the father lied in statements and on oath in these proceedings. The father worked in the financial services sector and his lies consisted of his initially not disclosing within the proceedings the fact that he had sold an enterprise owned by him and had received a sum of £111,000. The judge had to weigh up the rights and interests of the parties between themselves against the public interest and ruled that the injunction, which prohibited disclosure of the proceedings to third parties without the permission of the court, was upheld. The mother also lost her application to have this judgment published in a non-anonymised form. Judgment, 10/03/2014, free