Youth Court & Section 49 Anonymity

Section 49: the automatic restriction in detail

Section 49 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (CYPA 1933) prohibits the publication of any matter likely to lead to the identification of a young person (under 18) involved in youth court proceedings as a defendant, victim, or witness. The restriction is automatic — it applies from the moment proceedings begin and requires no court order.

The restriction covers any information that, alone or in combination with other published information, is likely to lead to identification. This is wider than simply naming — it includes:

• ›Name, surname, forename, or nickname
• ›Address (including town or neighbourhood if sufficiently small)
• ›School, college, or youth club
• ›Physical description — including any distinctive feature
• ›Photograph or image of any kind, including social media profile pictures
• ›Any combination of details that together could identify the young person to a reasonable reader
• ›Family members' names where those would lead to identification

Breach of section 49 is a criminal offence carrying a fine. Responsibility rests with the publisher — the editor or proprietor of the publication.

Section 45 YJCEA 1999 — young people in adult courts

When a young person appears in the Crown Court or the adult magistrates court — for example, because they are jointly charged with an adult, or because the offence is indictable-only — section 49 does not automatically apply. Instead, the court has the power under section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to make an order restricting identification.

A section 45 order must be made expressly by the court. If no order is made, there is no automatic restriction — though IPSO's Editors' Code still requires consideration of the welfare of minors in any coverage. Always check for a section 45 order when a young defendant appears in an adult court.

Section 45A YJCEA 1999 (inserted by the Crime and Courts Act 2013) gives courts additional power to restrict identification of young witnesses and victims in any criminal proceedings. See our reporting restrictions overview for the full picture.

When courts lift the restriction

Under section 49(4A) CYPA 1933, the youth court can lift the automatic restriction in whole or in part where it is in the public interest to do so, taking account of the young person's welfare. In practice, lifting orders are made in a small number of serious cases — typically where:

• ›The offence is of exceptional gravity and there is a significant public interest in identification.
• ›Public safety requires that the young person be identifiable — for example, where they are at large and pose a continued risk.
• ›The young person has turned 18 by the time of sentencing and the public interest in full reporting outweighs the residual welfare consideration.
• ›The young person has themselves sought to publicise their case in a way that has effectively waived the protection.

A lifting order must be recorded in writing by the court. If you believe a lifting order should be made, you can apply to the court — the media industry regularly does so in significant cases. Take legal advice before making such an application.

Jigsaw identification: the hidden risk

Jigsaw identification is the risk that individually innocuous pieces of information, published by different outlets, combine to identify a person who should be anonymous. It is a particular risk with youth court cases because:

• ⚠Local knowledge can make even partial details identifying — a description of a local area and a school year may be enough for many readers.
• ⚠Social media amplifies individual pieces of information and allows them to be aggregated rapidly.
• ⚠Once material is online, it is indexed and searchable — even if individual items are later removed.
• ⚠You cannot control what other outlets publish — but your piece contributes to the overall picture.

The IPSO Editors' Code clause 6 (Children) requires editors to take care and use their best judgment when covering stories involving minors. Even where section 49 has been technically complied with, IPSO can find a breach of the Code where jigsaw identification has occurred. See ipso.co.uk/editors-code-of-practice.

Common mistakes

• ⚠Naming the school without naming the defendant — the school name alone may be sufficient to identify the young person in a small community.
• ⚠Publishing a photograph of the scene where the young person can be seen in the background.
• ⚠Quoting a parent or family member whose name identifies the young person by association.
• ⚠Treating a section 45 order as if it were automatic — it requires a specific court order, which may not have been made.
• ⚠Assuming that because a young person has turned 18 before sentencing, the restriction no longer applies — section 49 applies to proceedings in the youth court regardless of current age.

Related guides

Frequently asked questions