header-logo header-logo

10 January 2025
Issue: 8100 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Profession
printer mail-detail

All family courts open to press

The reporting pilot has been deemed successful and will roll out to all family courts in England and Wales

Journalists and legal bloggers were first allowed into private and public law cases in the family courts in Cardiff, Leeds and Carlisle in January 2023 for the pilot, extending in January 2024 to public law cases at 19 family courts—nearly half of the total—and in July 2024 to include private law as well as public law cases at all the courts. Sir Andrew McFarlane, the president of the family division, described the extension as ‘another significant step in the judiciary’s ongoing work to increase transparency and improve public confidence in, and understanding of, the family justice system’.

Under the pilot, accredited journalists and bloggers are permitted to report on what they see and hear, subject to strict anonymity of family members and children involved and as long as a transparency order has been granted. To date, there has been no known breach of anonymity in reporting.

From 27 January, the reporting provisions will apply to all family courts. This means there will be a presumption that a transparency order is granted, unless there is a legitimate reason not to.

The rollout was approved by the Family Procedure Rule Committee last month and will be implemented step-by-step starting with public law cases then private law cases then magistrates’ courts.

A transparency pilot in financial remedy cases is also being rolled out nationally. The pilot has been running in Birmingham, Leeds and the Central Family Court since January 2024. It was extended to the Royal Courts of Justice in November.

It will apply to financial remedy proceedings in all courts from 29 January, under a pilot extension until January 2026.

Issue: 8100 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll