Willford, R (On the Application Of) v Financial Services Authority [2013] EWCA Civ 674 (13 June 2013)

Willford, R (On the Application Of) v Financial Services Authority [2013] EWCA Civ 674 (13 June 2013)

The application for anonymisation and redaction was refused because the principle of open justice requires publication of the court's judgment in full unless there are overriding grounds. The respondent's entry into public judicial review proceedings brought the matter into the public forum, and there was no cogent evidence that anonymisation or redaction was strictly necessary for the proper administration of justice.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 674
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Christopher Willford; Defendant/appellant: Financial Services Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Application for Anonymisation/redaction
Outcome
Application for anonymisation and redaction dismissed.
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Anonymity Orders, Judicial Review, Financial Services Disciplinary Proceedings
Administrative Law Financial Regulation Open Justice Anonymity Orders Judicial Review Financial Services Disciplinary Proceedings

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Willford

Claimant/respondent

Financial Services Authority

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Application for Anonymisation/redaction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court's judgment should be anonymised and/or redacted to protect the respondent's identity in the context of disciplinary proceedings by the Financial Services Authority.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for anonymisation and redaction was refused because the principle of open justice requires publication of the court's judgment in full unless there are overriding grounds. The respondent's entry into public judicial review proceedings brought the matter into the public forum, and there was no cogent evidence that anonymisation or redaction was strictly necessary for the proper administration of justice.

Court Disposition

Application for anonymisation and redaction dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment to be published in full without anonymisation or redaction.