Prohibition on Publishing Child's Name in Criminal Proceedings Upheld
📌 In brief
In this case, the court determined that publishing and broadcasting the name of a child who testified in criminal proceedings contravened the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987, highlighting the importance of protecting children from public exposure and potential humiliation.
⚖️ Legal holding
Publishing or broadcasting the name of a child who gives evidence in criminal proceedings is prohibited under the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987.
📖 What the law says
This section applies in criminal proceedings where a person who previously made a statement is unavailable to testify. It allows for the admission of hearsay evidence if certain conditions are met, such as the statement being made under a duty, shortly after the event, or against the maker's interest.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a legal practitioner.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
📄 Read the full judgment⚖️ View on the official court website ↗
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The prosecution proved that the witness was under 18 at the time of giving evidence and publication.
- The court found that the broadcaster's belief that consent was given was not reasonable.
- The law prohibits all publications and broadcasts of children's names in criminal proceedings, not just the first one.
- The court accepted the mother's evidence about the child's birth year, despite not knowing the exact date.
- The court rejected the father's affidavit evidence due to his pending perjury charge, affecting his credibility.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The argument that Section 11 only prohibits the first publication of a child's name was rejected.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the publication and broadcasting of the child's name was unlawful because it violated the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987, which aims to protect children from public identification and potential humiliation.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987, sections 11, 65(2), 135, and 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 were applied.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case, as the court found that the publication and broadcasting of the child's name was unlawful.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, this decision means that publishing or broadcasting the name of a child who testifies in criminal proceedings is prohibited under the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents that mattered, but it focused on the applicability of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 to the case at hand.