Alcott (No. 2) [2016] EWHC 2414 (Fam) (29 September 2016)

Alcott (No. 2) [2016] EWHC 2414 (Fam) (29 September 2016)

The court refused to lift reporting restrictions on evidence heard in private, finding no legitimate public interest in reporting such evidence and that doing so would disproportionately interfere with the parties' and child's right to privacy. The court permitted publication of the judgment and identification of the parents, but prohibited publication of the child's name during his minority.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2414 (Fam)
Parties
Mother: Katy Ashworth; Father: Ben Alcott; Child: D (child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Family Law Hague Convention Child Abduction / Media Reporting Applications Following Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Applications to report evidence refused; publication of judgment and party identification permitted; prohibition on publication of child's name ordered.
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Hague Convention 1980, Reporting Restrictions, Freedom of Expression, Right to Privacy, Publication of Judgments
Family Law Media Law Human Rights Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Reporting Restrictions Freedom of Expression Right to Privacy +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Katy Ashworth

Mother

Ben Alcott

Father

D (child)

Child

Procedural Posture

Family Law Hague Convention Child Abduction / Media Reporting Applications Following Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to lift reporting restrictions to allow media to report evidence heard in private
  2. 2 Whether to permit publication of the judgment and identification of the parties
  3. 3 Whether to prohibit publication of the child's name

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to lift reporting restrictions on evidence heard in private, finding no legitimate public interest in reporting such evidence and that doing so would disproportionately interfere with the parties' and child's right to privacy. The court permitted publication of the judgment and identification of the parents, but prohibited publication of the child's name during his minority.

Court Disposition

Applications to report evidence refused; publication of judgment and party identification permitted; prohibition on publication of child's name ordered.

Orders

  • Refusal to lift section 12 AJA 1960 reporting restriction on evidence
  • Permission to publish judgment with identification of parents