A decision by the Courts Service to report on family law cases, following a recommendation from Ms Justice Denham, cannot go ahead because of legal advice.
Ms Justice Denham recommended in the Sixth Report of a Courts Commission that a specialist reporter be appointed to report on family law cases on a pilot basis.
Last year a barrister, Ms Siobhan Flockton, was appointed as family law recorder and given a three-fold brief: to provide information about the operation and day-to-day activity in the family law courts of a general nature; to provide more in-depth statistical information on the family law courts; and to record, with the consent of the parties, judgments in the District and Circuit family law courts for publication.
Following her appointment, doubt was expressed about the legality of the third aspect of her work, and the Courts Service Board, which consists of senior member of the judiciary and representatives of relevant government departments and of the legal profession, sought senior counsel opinion.
That opinion was understood to state that, in the light of the in camera rule governing family law cases, Ms Flockton could not attend cases and report on them, even with the parties' consent. A very strict interpretation of this rule has been given by a number of High Court judgments, which represent the law on the subject at the moment.
The implications will be discussed at the next meeting of the Courts Service Board. Given that the Sixth Report on a Courts Commission was accepted by the Government, and some form of reporting on family law cases has also been supported by the Law Reform Commission, the Courts Service Board is likely to want to push ahead with its decision.
However, the only way that can be done now is through legislation amending the in camera rule. The Courts Service Board can make recommendations to Government on court matters, and this is the likely outcome.