Griffiths v Tickle
[2021] EWCA Civ 1882 the Court of Appeal was considering the issue of naming the parents in proceedings, notwithstanding the risk of identification of the child. The facts of the case were wholly different but it is an example of a case where the public interest in naming the parents was a significant factor despite the likely identification of the child.
- Mrs Justice Lieven DBE :
- Issues
- The Facts
- The Law
- Parental Responsibility Orders and contact issues
- FC v MC
- A v B and C
- D v E (Termination of Parental Responsibility)
- TJ v CV
- P and L (Minors)
- Section 91(14)
- Re P (Section 91(14) Guidelines) (Residence and Religious Heritage)
- Naming JM
- Re J (A Child)
- Re S, A Child
- Griffiths v Tickle
- The evidence
- Re B
- The Guardian’s position
- Conclusions and Findings
- Section 91(14)
- Naming JM in the judgment
- Tickle v Griffiths