X v Y (Rev1) [2025] EWFC 237 (B) (31 July 2025)

X v Y (Rev1) [2025] EWFC 237 (B) (31 July 2025)

Disclosure of the 28 February 2025 judgment to the Metropolitan Police is justified in the public interest for both professional standards investigation and the respondent's complaint, given the gravity of findings against a serving police officer and the need for full context; further disclosure of all case papers is refused due to lack of notice, overbreadth, and privacy concerns; publication of this judgment (but not the February judgment) is permitted in anonymised form to protect privacy and the integrity of the police investigation.

Citation
[2025] EWFC 237 (B)
Parties
Applicant: X; Respondent: Y; Intervenor: Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Family Law Act 1996 Application (non Molestation Order) / Post Judgment Application for Disclosure and Publication
Outcome
Application granted in part and refused in part
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Judgments, Confidentiality in Family Proceedings, Professional Standards for Police Officers, Anonymisation of Judgments, Publication of Family Court Judgments
Family Law Police Misconduct Disclosure of Judgments Confidentiality in Family Proceedings Professional Standards for Police Officers Anonymisation of Judgments Publication of Family Court Judgments

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Applicant

Y

Respondent

Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Family Law Act 1996 Application (non Molestation Order) / Post Judgment Application for Disclosure and Publication

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to permit disclosure of the 28 February 2025 judgment to the Metropolitan Police for professional standards investigation and respondent's complaint
  2. 2 Whether to permit disclosure of further case papers to the Metropolitan Police
  3. 3 Whether to permit publication of this and/or the February judgment

Ratio Decidendi

Disclosure of the 28 February 2025 judgment to the Metropolitan Police is justified in the public interest for both professional standards investigation and the respondent's complaint, given the gravity of findings against a serving police officer and the need for full context; further disclosure of all case papers is refused due to lack of notice, overbreadth, and privacy concerns; publication of this judgment (but not the February judgment) is permitted in anonymised form to protect privacy and the integrity of the police investigation.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part and refused in part

Orders

  • Permission granted to disclose the 28 February 2025 judgment and order to the relevant police conduct authority for both professional standards and complaint purposes.
  • Permission refused for disclosure of further case papers to the Metropolitan Police.