PMC v Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board

PMC v Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board

The Court of Appeal held that the common law confers jurisdiction to grant prospective anonymity and reporting restriction orders in civil proceedings involving children and protected parties, even where there has been prior publicity. Such orders are strictly necessary in the interests of justice to protect vulnerable claimants from further infringement of their private and family life. Dartford guidance remains broadly applicable, subject to clarification on listing and process. Section 11 does not require withholding orders to be made at the outset. The appeal was allowed and a prospective anonymity order directed.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: PMC (a child by his mother and litigation friend FLR); Defendant/respondent: Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board; Intervener: British Broadcasting Corporation (the BBC); Intervener: Personal Injuries Bar Association; Advocate to the Court: Attorney General; Intervener: Official Solicitor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Anonymity Orders, Reporting Restrictions, Children and Protected Parties, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR, Court Approval of Settlements
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Human Rights Open Justice Anonymity Orders Reporting Restrictions Children and Protected Parties Article 8 ECHR +2 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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PMC (a child by his mother and litigation friend FLR)

Claimant/appellant

Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board

Defendant/respondent

British Broadcasting Corporation (the BBC)

Intervener

Personal Injuries Bar Association

Intervener

Attorney General

Advocate to the Court

Official Solicitor

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Jurisdictional foundation for open justice principle and derogations
  2. 2 Power to grant anonymisation and reporting restriction orders in clinical negligence cases involving children/protected parties
  3. 3 Applicability of common law and statutory powers for reporting restrictions

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the common law confers jurisdiction to grant prospective anonymity and reporting restriction orders in civil proceedings involving children and protected parties, even where there has been prior publicity. Such orders are strictly necessary in the interests of justice to protect vulnerable claimants from further infringement of their private and family life. Dartford guidance remains broadly applicable, subject to clarification on listing and process. Section 11 does not require withholding orders to be made at the outset. The appeal was allowed and a prospective anonymity order directed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • A prospective anonymity order to protect the claimant's identity and private information, prohibiting publication of specified identifying details after the date of the order.
  • Existing media coverage not affected by the order.