Parent charged with murder of son - court's inherent jurisdiction to restrain publication of identity of parent and son to protect privacy of surviving child in care proceedings - surviving child's rights not paramount but balanced against freedom of expression

In re S (A Child)(Identification: Restrictions on Publication) [2003] EWCA Civ 963: CA (Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, Lords Justice Hale and Latham): 10 July 2003

A child S, aged seven, was the subject of care proceedings after the death of his older brother in hospital.

In those proceedings, the judge found that the brother had died as a result of acute salt poisoning administered by the mother.

She was charged with murder and was due to be tried.

The judge made an order prohibiting the publication of information which might lead to the identification of S.

On the application of the press, the judge varied the order, allowing publication of details revealed in court.

The press accepted that S could not be identified, but wished to publish the names and photographs of the parents and dead child.

S's guardian appealed.

Cherie Booth QC and Frank Feehan (instructed by Moss & Coleman, Hornchurch) for the guardian; Gavin Millar QC and Anthony Hudson (instructed by Farrer & Co) for the press interests; Alison H Russell and Siobhan F Kelly (instructed by Kenneth Elliott & Rowe, Romford) for the mother.

Held, dismissing the appeal (Lord Justice Hale dissenting), that the High Court had inherent jurisdiction to restrain the publication of the identity of a defendant and her victim in a murder trial to protect the privacy of her child who was the subject of care proceedings; that the rights of the child were not paramount, but his right to respect for his private and family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had to be balanced against the right to freedom of expression in article 10; and that reporting restrictions should not be imposed.

(WLR)