Reporting on Family Court Cases in the UK

The family court reporting framework

Family courts deal with some of the most sensitive matters in the justice system: children being taken into local authority care, custody disputes, adoption, domestic abuse orders, and financial settlements following divorce. The default position has historically been one of privacy — most hearings are held in private — but this has been significantly reformed in recent years to improve transparency.

Two key statutes govern what you can report. Section 97 of the Children Act 1989 prohibits publication of any material that is intended, or likely, to identify a child involved in proceedings under the Act. Section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 makes it contempt to publish information relating to proceedings held in private concerning children, minors, or persons under disability. On top of these prohibitions, courts now have the power to make transparency ordersthat positively permit limited reporting — subject to strict conditions about protecting children’s identities.

When this matters for journalists

• 1You want to cover a high-profile child custody battle — you may attend but reporting is tightly restricted unless a transparency order is in force.
• 2You are investigating a local authority's child protection decisions — attending a care case hearing is one thing; reporting the evidence is another.
• 3A parent goes to the media after losing a custody fight — their right to tell their story is constrained by the proceedings and your ability to report it.
• 4You are covering a fact-finding hearing in a domestic abuse case — the fact that findings were made may be reportable; the evidence and family identities usually are not.
• 5A family court judge publishes a judgment on Bailii — published judgments can normally be reported, but check whether the judgment anonymises the family.
• 6You are reporting on forced marriage or FGM proceedings — additional considerations apply beyond the standard family court rules.
• 7A local council's safeguarding failures are the subject of a care case — systemic failures may be matters of legitimate public interest, but the child's identity must be protected.

Red flags to watch for

• ⚠No transparency order is in force — attending is permitted, but you may not be able to report the substance of proceedings.
• ⚠A transparency order is in force but contains specific prohibitions — read it carefully before filing anything.
• ⚠The case involves a child who is also involved in parallel criminal proceedings — two separate sets of restrictions may apply.
• ⚠A party to the proceedings is feeding you information that was spoken in the private hearing — publishing it may constitute contempt even if you were not present.
• ⚠You are filing copy that identifies the family home, school, or area in a way that could identify the children.
• ⚠Published judgments on Bailii are anonymised — never un-anonymise them.
• ⚠A parent claims the court has "gagged" them — their s.12 obligations do not disappear because they want to speak to the press.

Pre-publication checklist

• I have confirmed that a transparency order is in force and I have a copy of it.
• I have read the transparency order and understand exactly what it permits and prohibits.
• My copy does not identify any child party or witness by name, photo, school, or area.
• I am not publishing anything told to me by a party that was said in a private hearing (s.12 risk).
• I have confirmed that any Bailii judgment I am drawing from has been published with judicial authority.
• I have checked whether the case involves any parallel criminal or care proceedings with separate restrictions.
• I have taken legal advice if I am unsure whether what I plan to publish is within the transparency order.
• I am not reproducing any document filed in the proceedings without checking whether this is permitted.

Common mistakes

• ›Publishing what a party told you about what was said in a private hearing — this is s.12 contempt even if they gave you the information voluntarily.
• ›Assuming you can report freely because you were allowed to attend — attendance rights and reporting rights are different.
• ›Un-anonymising a Bailii judgment by identifying who the parties are from context clues.
• ›Using a photo of the family home in a way that enables identification of the children.
• ›Relying on a transparency order from a different case — each order is case-specific.
• ›Failing to distinguish between what is in a published judgment (reportable) and what was said in proceedings (may not be).
• ›Assuming financial remedy hearings have no restrictions — s.12 still applies unless a transparency order says otherwise.

Related guides

Primary sources

• Children Act 1989 s.97 (legislation.gov.uk)
• Administration of Justice Act 1960 s.12 (legislation.gov.uk)
• Family Procedure Rules 2010 r.27.11 (legislation.gov.uk)
• Transparency Implementation Group — reports and guidance (judiciary.gov.uk)
• BAILII — Family Division judgments
• NUJ guidance on family court reporting

Frequently asked questions