RC v FP [2025] EWFC 123 (08 May 2025)

RC v FP [2025] EWFC 123 (08 May 2025)

The court refused to disapply AJA 1960 s12 and granted the extension of the Transparency Order to preserve the child's anonymity until their 18th birthday. The judge found that the risk of significant harm to the child's welfare, privacy, and family relationships from intense and global media coverage, given the nature of the allegations and the parties' public profiles, outweighed the Article 10 and 8 rights of the mother and media to report the identities and details. The balancing exercise required by Re S and subsequent authorities was applied, with particular weight given to the child's Article 8 rights and the evidence of likely harm, and the lack of clear, specific proposals from...

Citation
[2025] EWFC 123
Parties
Applicant: RC; Respondent: FP; Intervener/applicant (media): BBC; Intervener/applicant (media): Ms. Lucia Osborne-Crowley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Family Law (private Law Children, Reporting Restrictions) / Final Judgment on Cross Applications Regarding Extension/disapplication of Transparency Order and Related Reliefs
Outcome
Transparency Order extended; media applications to disapply AJA 1960 s12 refused; declaration of parentage granted; s91(14) order made; costs application reserved for separate judgment.
Legal Topics
Reporting Restrictions, Transparency Orders, Children's Welfare, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR, Open Justice, Domestic Abuse, Parental Responsibility, Costs
Family Law Media Law Human Rights Reporting Restrictions Transparency Orders Children's Welfare Article 8 ECHR Article 10 ECHR +4 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 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RC

Applicant

FP

Respondent

BBC

Intervener/applicant (media)

Ms. Lucia Osborne-Crowley

Intervener/applicant (media)

Procedural Posture

Family Law (private Law Children, Reporting Restrictions) / Final Judgment on Cross Applications Regarding Extension/disapplication of Transparency Order and Related Reliefs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend the Transparency Order to preserve the child's anonymity until age 18
  2. 2 Whether to disapply section 12 Administration of Justice Act 1960 to permit media reporting of parties' and child's identities and case documents
  3. 3 Balancing Article 8 (privacy) and Article 10 (expression/open justice) rights in the context of family proceedings involving a child and allegations of domestic abuse

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to disapply AJA 1960 s12 and granted the extension of the Transparency Order to preserve the child's anonymity until their 18th birthday. The judge found that the risk of significant harm to the child's welfare, privacy, and family relationships from intense and global media coverage, given the nature of the allegations and the parties' public profiles, outweighed the Article 10 and 8 rights of the mother and media to report the identities and details. The balancing exercise required by Re S and subsequent authorities was applied, with particular weight given to the child's Article 8 rights and the evidence of likely harm, and the lack of clear, specific proposals from...

Court Disposition

Transparency Order extended; media applications to disapply AJA 1960 s12 refused; declaration of parentage granted; s91(14) order made; costs application reserved for separate judgment.

Orders

  • Transparency Order extended to preserve child's anonymity until 14 May 2037 (child's 18th birthday)
  • Applications by BBC and Ms. Osborne-Crowley to disapply AJA 1960 s12 refused