D & Anor v Persons Unknown [2021] EWHC 157 (QB) (04 February 2021)

D & Anor v Persons Unknown [2021] EWHC 157 (QB) (04 February 2021)

The claimants' rights under Articles 2, 3, and 8 ECHR are engaged and outweigh the Article 10 rights of the press and public. There is compelling, undisputed expert evidence that identification would create a real and immediate risk to life, cause serious psychological harm, and fundamentally undermine rehabilitation. The case is exceptional and justifies the exercise of the Venables jurisdiction to grant lifelong anonymity. The injunction is necessary and proportionate to protect the claimants' rights.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 157 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: D; Claimant: F; Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (high Court, Queen's Bench Division, Media and Communications List) / Final Judgment on Application for Lifelong Anonymity Injunction
Outcome
Lifelong anonymity injunctions granted to both claimants.
Legal Topics
Anonymity Orders, Open Justice Principle, Article 2 ECHR (right to Life), Article 3 ECHR (prohibition of Inhuman or Degrading Treatment), Article 8 ECHR (right to Private and Family Life), Article 10 ECHR (freedom of Expression), Venables Jurisdiction, Reporting Restrictions
Human Rights Law Media Law Criminal Law Anonymity Orders Open Justice Principle Article 2 ECHR (right to Life) Article 3 ECHR (prohibition of Inhuman or Degrading Treatment) Article 8 ECHR (right to Private and Family Life) +3 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D

Claimant

F

Claimant

Persons Unknown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (high Court, Queen's Bench Division, Media and Communications List) / Final Judgment on Application for Lifelong Anonymity Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether lifelong anonymity should be granted to claimants convicted as children of murder, to prevent identification as Angela Wrightson's killers
  2. 2 Whether the case meets the exceptional threshold for the exercise of the Venables jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether the claimants' Article 2, 3, and 8 rights outweigh the Article 10 rights of the press and public

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' rights under Articles 2, 3, and 8 ECHR are engaged and outweigh the Article 10 rights of the press and public. There is compelling, undisputed expert evidence that identification would create a real and immediate risk to life, cause serious psychological harm, and fundamentally undermine rehabilitation. The case is exceptional and justifies the exercise of the Venables jurisdiction to grant lifelong anonymity. The injunction is necessary and proportionate to protect the claimants' rights.

Court Disposition

Lifelong anonymity injunctions granted to both claimants.

Orders

  • Permanent injunction prohibiting publication of the claimants' names, addresses, or any information likely to identify them as the murderers of Angela Wrightson.
  • Order applies contra mundum (against all persons), not just named defendants.