He confirmed the strong starting point that financial remedy proceedings are generally conducted in private, but that there is a fundamental
constitutional principle of open justice in the Family Court's and the need to have regard to freedom of expression.
As the Court of Appeal said in para 1 of the judgment, these procedures, developed as part of the fight against terrorism, represent «exceptions to the
fundamental principle of open justice.»
In the other, it ruled that such a «closed procedure» was such an insult to «fundamental» common
law principles of open justice and fairness that no court, however lofty, would have the jurisdiction to order it without statutory authority.
He said that the security services, like MI5 and MI6, «can not be allowed to ride roughshod over
the principles of open justice».
He says he can not back the changes in their current form, adding that the security services» concerns «can not be allowed to ride roughshod over
the principles of open justice».
(v) The more of these expedients the court might consider adopting, the stronger the case must be for invading
the principle of open justice.
Only «clear and cogent evidence» that it was strictly necessary to keep an offender's identity confidential would lead a court to derogate from
the principle of open justice.
(e) The more of those expedients the court might consider adopting, the stronger the case had to be for invading
the principle of open justice.
Do the government's proposals on justice & security challenge
the principle of open justice, asks Tim Suter
A fundamental aspect of the proper administration of justice is
the principle of open justice.
An opinion piece for the Times on the need to protect confidential communications between lawyer and client (Legal Professional Privilege), and why that can sometimes trump
the principle of open justice.
The courts have an inherent jurisdiction to determine how
the principle of open justice should be applied [27]- [37] and can permit the identity of a party or witness to be withheld from public disclosure where necessary in the interests of justice [38 - 41].
The principle of open justice is protected and qualified by the ECHR as it is in domestic law [42]- [54].
(Judicial review; whether anonymisation of names of complainants a breach of
the principle of open justice; whether complainant waives Article 8 rights by complaining to regulator)
As soon as it addressed itself to the superior court,
the principle of open justice applied:
Tugenhadt J, however, held that the order «contained derogations from
the principle of open justice» and should be scrutinised by the court.
It was consistent with
the principle of open justice and there was a legitimate public interest in the outcome of this extraordinary case.
The security services will see the judgments as a fly in their ointment, arguing that the protection of the public from terrorism sometimes trumps
the principle of open justice, that justice is done but is also seen to be done.