FD25P00554 - [2025] EWHC 2878 (Fam)
Family Division of the High Court

FD25P00554 - [2025] EWHC 2878 (Fam)

Fecha: 10-Nov-2025

Section 1

This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published.

Mr Justice MacDonald:

INTRODUCTION

1.

On 5 September 2025, I granted an application by Times Media Limited (hereafter “TML”) represented by Mr Wolanski KC for an order permitting, subject to certain redactions, disclosure to TML of documents from the process by which the court approved the financial remedies order agreed between Angela Rayner, the former Housing Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of the Labour Party, and Mark James Rayner. Ms Rayner is represented in her personal capacity only by Ms Hillas KC. Mr Rayner is unrepresented and did not attend. Party to the process by which the court approved the financial remedies order financial remedy proceedings was the Professional Trustee of a bare trust established for one of Ms Rayner and Mr Rayner’s children. The Trust is represented by Mr Learmonth KC. Ms Rayner and Mr Rayner are also trustees.

2.

Having heard the submissions of the parties, I granted permission for disclosure to TML of orders dated 23 June 2023 and 2 September 2025 and the position statement put before the court on 2 September 2025. The former order concerned the financial arrangements following the divorce of Mr Rayner and Ms Rayner. The latter order resulted from an application by Ms Rayner to be released from undertakings given in the order of 23 June 2023, to enable her to provide information to Sir Laurie Magnus, the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards, and to make a public statement to the media on 3 September 2025.

3.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Trust applied for an order that TML pay its costs in the sum of £15,522 inclusive of VAT. That application for costs was opposed by TML. In circumstances where the application by the Trust that TML pay its costs seemed to me to raise a tension between the possibly chilling effect of costs orders against the press when seeking disclosure and the need to preserve finite funds held in trust for the purpose of meeting the ongoing needs of a vulnerable minor and, in due course, adult, I reserved my decision on the question of costs and now set out my decision and my reasons for it.