header-logo header-logo

29 January 2025
Issue: 8102 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Child law , Criminal , Media
printer mail-detail

Judges have duty to sit in public, says Vos MR

Three judges in historic care and private family law proceedings involving Sara Sharif could be named next week, after the Court of Appeal unanimously held the High Court did not have jurisdiction to prohibit the publication of their identities.

Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls, gave the judges a preparation period of seven days ‘to allow HMCTS to put measures in place to protect them from any potential harm once their names are released’.

Ten-year-old Sara Sharif was murdered by her father and stepmother in August 2023, in a shocking case that has provoked widespread public outrage. A group of journalists and broadcasters brought a claim seeking to overturn a reporting restriction imposed by Mr Justice Williams regarding the names of the three judges (and other social work professionals).

Counsel for the historic judges filed a note indicating none of them had sought anonymity but each of them had serious concerns about the risks to themselves and their families if they were now identified. Moreover, HMCTS security had warned the judges’ addresses could be accessed easily and their personal safety ‘severely affected’.

Giving the lead judgment in Tickle & anor v The BBC & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 42 last week, however, Sir Geoffrey allowed the appeal ‘primarily’ on the ground of jurisdiction but also on the grounds of procedural irregularity and unfairness.

He said: ‘It is the duty of judges to sit in public… In accepting office, all judges will or should be aware that that is the expectation, because public scrutiny of judges and the justice process is essential to the rule of law.’

Two of the judges have since retired. One made a protective order removing Sara and her siblings into care on an emergency basis, while the other made an interim care order ensuring the children did not return to either parent while risk assessments were carried out. The third judge approved a joint application by the mother and father to have the child arrangements order varied by consent in the father’s favour in 2019 after first ordering a full report by Surrey Social Services.

Issue: 8102 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Child law , Criminal , Media
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