Andrew James Griffiths v Louise Tickle & Ors.

Andrew James Griffiths v Louise Tickle & Ors.

A contempt of court may have been committed by Mr Clayton when he disclosed confidential information from Children Act proceedings to a third party without court permission, as the disclosure was not authorised by rules of court or common law defences. However, given the limited nature of the disclosure, lack of...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Andrew James Griffiths; Respondent/applicant: Louise Tickle; Respondent: Brian Farmer; Respondent: Kate Elizabeth Griffiths; Respondent (through Guardian): G (A Child); Intervener: Rights of Women; Intervener: Association of Lawyers for Children; Respondent (to Application): Richard Clayton QC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family/children Act) and Ancillary Application / Judgment on Ancillary Application and Consideration of Contempt
Outcome
Application to report granted; no contempt proceedings initiated; Mr Clayton to bear his own costs.
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Confidential Information, Children Act Proceedings, Open Justice, Embargoed Judgments, Professional Conduct of Advocates
Family Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Disclosure of Confidential Information Children Act Proceedings Open Justice Embargoed Judgments Professional Conduct of Advocates

Source-derived case record

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

Andrew James Griffiths

Appellant

Louise Tickle

Respondent/applicant

Brian Farmer

Respondent

Kate Elizabeth Griffiths

Respondent

G (A Child)

Respondent (through Guardian)

Rights of Women

Intervener

Association of Lawyers for Children

Intervener

Richard Clayton QC

Respondent (to Application)

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family/children Act) and Ancillary Application / Judgment on Ancillary Application and Consideration of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disclosure of confidential appeal documents in Children Act proceedings to a third party without court permission amounted to contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether permission should be granted to report on the Note and witness statement regarding the disclosure
  3. 3 Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated against counsel

Ratio Decidendi

A contempt of court may have been committed by Mr Clayton when he disclosed confidential information from Children Act proceedings to a third party without court permission, as the disclosure was not authorised by rules of court or common law defences. However, given the limited nature of the disclosure, lack of harm, mitigating factors, and prompt apology, contempt proceedings are not necessary or proportionate. Permission to report on the Note and witness statement is granted, excluding private/personal information and the intermediary's identity.

Court Disposition

Application to report granted; no contempt proceedings initiated; Mr Clayton to bear his own costs.

Orders

  • Permission granted to Ms Tickle to report on the Note and witness statement, excluding private/personal information and the intermediary's identity.
  • No further action to be taken against Mr Clayton regarding the disclosure.