Tickle v Surrey County Council

Subject Matter

CHILDREN — Court’s inherent jurisdiction — Restriction on publication

[2024] EWHC 3330 (Fam), Fam D

PRACTICE — Anonymity order — Judge — Journalists seeking disclosure of documents relating to historic care and private law family proceedings relating to children — Court of own motion making anonymity order prohibiting publication of names of judges in those proceedings — Whether court having such jurisdiction — Whether open justice principle applying to family proceedings — Special position of judges as regards open justice — Administration of Justice Act 1960 (8 & 9 Eliz 2, c 65), s 12 — Senior Courts Act 1981 (c 54), s 37 — Children Act 1989 (c 41), s 97 — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), s 6, Sch 1, Pt I, arts 2, 3, 8

[2025] EWCA Civ 42; [2025] Fam 105; [2025] 2 WLR 714; [2025] 2 FLR 506; [2025] WLR(D) 45; Press summary, CA

Appellate History

Commentary

A Lawyer Writes
Judge hits back Case comment

Judges could be named Case comment

Law Society Gazette
Court of Appeal to hear challenge to judges’ anonymity in Sara Sharif case Case comment

Transparency Project
Court of Appeal to consider the idea of the anonymous judge Case comment

Court of Appeal says judges’ names should not be anonymised Case comment

A Lawyer Writes
Judges can be named Case comment

UK Human Rights Blog
Judicial Anonymity? Not this time. Case comment

Law Society Gazette
Anonymising the names of judges Case comment