Page 180 - Law and the Media

Reporting Restrictions
orders are routinely made in family cases and education cases in the county court. They are
also routinely made in criminal proceedings in the magistrates’ court and crown court where
the child is the defendant, although they are not automatic where the child is simply a
witness.

When considering such an order in regard to a young person who is a defendant, the court
will balance the age of the young person and the potential damage to him of public
identification as a criminal against the general proposition that there is a strong and proper
public interest in identifying criminals, particularly of serious and detestable crimes. In
weighing this balance the court must also have regard to the welfare of the child, but not to
the exclusion of all other factors (Section 44 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933).
Section 39 does not give the court an express power to restrict the publication of the name
of a defendant in criminal proceedings who is not a child or a young person (R v Crown
Court at Southwark ex parte Goodwin (1991)).

The trial judge should give reasons for his decision, and it will only be in ‘rare and
exceptional cases’ that an order under Section 39 will be discharged by the Court of
Appeal.

9.5.2 Children Act 1989

Family proceedings often commence in the magistrates’ court. Restrictions on the reporting
of family proceedings in the magistrates’ court are automatically imposed by Sections 71(1)
and (1A) of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 and Section 97(2) of the Children Act 1989. The
automatic restriction imposed by Section 97(2) of the Children Act 1989 has been extended
to the reporting of any family proceedings before a county court and the High Court by
Section 72 of the Access to Justice Act 1999.

9.5.3 Wardship proceedings

Wardship proceedings are heard in chambers. In general, the media may not attend or report
on such hearings (Section 12(1)(a) of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 as amended by
Section 108(5) of the Children Act 1989).

The purpose of the prohibition is to protect the wardship proceedings, not the confidentiality
of the child himself:

. . . the mere status of being a ward does not confer on a child any right as such to
have its affairs cloaked in secrecy. The privilege of confidentiality is that of the
court, not of the child, and the primary purpose of that privilege is to protect the
court in the exercise of its paternal functions.
(Re X and Others (Minors) (Wardship: Disclosure of Documents) (1992))
143