W v M (TOLATA Proceedings: Anonymity) [2012] EWHC 1679 (Fam) (25 June 2012)

W v M (TOLATA Proceedings: Anonymity) [2012] EWHC 1679 (Fam) (25 June 2012)

The application for anonymisation fails because the evidence provided is insufficient to engage Article 8 or Article 6 rights; mere assertion and hearsay do not meet the threshold for derogation from open justice. The proceedings will be heard in public and reported without anonymisation, except for any specific reporting restrictions that may be sought and justified at trial.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 1679 (Fam)
Parties
Claimant: W; Defendant: M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 / Interlocutory Application for Anonymisation Order
Outcome
Application for anonymisation order dismissed
Legal Topics
Anonymisation Orders, Open Justice, Reporting Restrictions, Children's Rights, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, Trusts of Land
Family Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Anonymisation Orders Open Justice Reporting Restrictions Children's Rights Freedom of Expression +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 6 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W

Claimant

M

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application Under Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 / Interlocutory Application for Anonymisation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an anonymisation order should be granted in proceedings under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996
  2. 2 Balancing Article 8 (privacy) and Article 10 (freedom of expression) rights
  3. 3 Protection of children's interests in reporting

Ratio Decidendi

The application for anonymisation fails because the evidence provided is insufficient to engage Article 8 or Article 6 rights; mere assertion and hearsay do not meet the threshold for derogation from open justice. The proceedings will be heard in public and reported without anonymisation, except for any specific reporting restrictions that may be sought and justified at trial.

Court Disposition

Application for anonymisation order dismissed

Orders

  • Proceedings to be heard in public without anonymisation
  • Press may report proceedings fully, subject to any specific reporting restrictions justified at trial