G (a child)

G (a child)

The order prohibiting disclosure was too general and imprecise to be enforceable, especially with a penal notice attached. The statutory and rule-based framework provides adequate protection, and any further restriction must be clear. The appeal is allowed and the order is substituted with a more precise form, permitting limited disclosure for advice-seeking purposes.

Parties
Appellant: Mr B (Father); Subject: AG (Child); Respondent: Mother; Advocate to the Court: CAFCASS Legal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family) / Appeal From Manchester County Court Order (contact Proceedings)
Outcome
Appeal allowed (in part)
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Court Documents, Litigants in Person, Contact Orders, Confidentiality in Family Proceedings
Family Law Civil Procedure Disclosure of Court Documents Litigants in Person Contact Orders Confidentiality in Family 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr B (Father)

Appellant

AG (Child)

Subject

Mother

Respondent

CAFCASS Legal

Advocate to the Court

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family) / Appeal From Manchester County Court Order (contact Proceedings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether paragraph 3 of the order prohibiting disclosure of court documents to organisations such as Families Need Fathers was lawful and sufficiently precise
  2. 2 Whether the statutory and rule-based restrictions on disclosure are adequate or discriminatory against litigants in person
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'publication' and 'publish' in the context of family proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The order prohibiting disclosure was too general and imprecise to be enforceable, especially with a penal notice attached. The statutory and rule-based framework provides adequate protection, and any further restriction must be clear. The appeal is allowed and the order is substituted with a more precise form, permitting limited disclosure for advice-seeking purposes.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed (in part)

Orders

  • Paragraph 3 of Judge Hamilton's order set aside and replaced with a more precise order prohibiting disclosure except for limited advice-seeking purposes.
  • All other applications for permission to appeal dismissed.