In Griffiths v Tickle & Ors (Re Disclosure by Counsel) [2022] EWCA Civ 465 [2022] All ER (D) 28 (Apr), the court admonished Richard Clayton QC for having been potentially in breach of court rules forbidding publication of details of any case involving children heard in private. Clayton apologised for what he said was an unintended breach. He had disclosed in confidence his unredacted skeleton argument to a third-party family lawyer not involved in the case and did so for a litigation-related purpose. The court held it was not proportionate to initiate formal proceedings for contempt.
The case concerned the disgraced former MP Andrew Griffiths, who failed to convince the court to anonymise the parents in the case. The court handed down that decision in December, but left over the separate issue about counsel’s disclosure in potential breach of court rules.
Handing down judgment last week, Lord Justice Warby said: ‘This was a significant breach of the confidentiality regime that exists to safeguard the rights and interests of children in proceedings of this kind… In the event the harm was limited; this was a careless breach and not a deliberate one… We do not consider it necessary or appropriate to take any further action.’
Referring to a recent case where a draft judgment was distributed among chambers professionals so they could write a press release, Warby LJ added: ‘As the Master of the Rolls reiterated only a few weeks ago, strict adherence to the terms of the embargo on draft judgments is of great importance: R (Counsel General for Wales) v The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2022] EWCA Civ 181 [2022] All ER (D) 79 (Feb).’
