Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE:P v Independent Print Ltd and Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 756, [2012] COPLR 110

Sep 29, 2018, 21:32 PM
Slug : 2011ewcaciv756-1
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 25, 2012, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 98937

(Court of Appeal, Ward, Carnwath, Tomlinson LJJ, 4 July 2011)

The young man had been born into a severely dysfunctional family and suffered from severe uncontrolled epilepsy. He was taken into care and was subsequently adopted. His adoptive mother disagreed with the treatment he was being provided with and without any supervision by medics withdrew all of his current medication. He was admitted to hospital with life threatening epileptic seizures and the local authority brought proceedings to determine his future.

The young man was ordered to live independently from his adoptive mother and on the date of the review, without prior warning, the Independent newspaper sought permission to attend and report on the hearing. The judge refused to adjourn and granted the newspaper permission to report subject to certain restrictions. The young man appealed.

The judge had properly considered the relevant factors and his decision not to adjourn had been fair and proper. In making his decision the judge had carefully balanced the young man's Art 8 rights with the Art 10 rights of the media and had come to the correct conclusion.

Categories :
  • Court of Protection
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from