Reflections on 2025: The case of M v F & Anor

As 2025 comes to a close, we reflect on those cases heard by the family courts this year that have shaped the future of legal practice. 

In the case of M V F & Anor,[1] following an application by the mother, Ms Justice Harris examined the court’s jurisdiction to grant permission to a party in private law children proceedings to publish information about the case and to speak about their court experience in public. This is a significant departure from the usual rules which require parties to keep the details of these sorts of cases confidential.

Case facts

Following protracted private law proceedings between a mother and father, the mother made an application for permission to be able to: -

1. Publish media articles about her experiences of the family court system and the domestic abuse she suffered at the hands of the father, using an alias; and
2. Speak at events facilitated by organisations such as Cafcass, women's right groups and children's rights groups, using an alias.

In a helpful judgement, Miss Justice Harris highlighted that the family procedure rules held no specific power currently to grant such permission. Whilst FPR 12.73 and 12.75 provide that a party can communicate information to professionals to receive support or advice and FPR 12.73A, 14.14A and PD 12R permit reporters and bloggers to publish information from proceedings to which FPR 12 applies (providing the child is not identified) – there is no consideration of under what circumstances the court would permit a party to speak directly about the experiences- using an alias to protect the child’s privacy.

The court conducted a balancing exercise of s12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 and the parties’ rights under Article 10 ECHR, Miss Justice Harris granted permission to M on both counts. 

Case Analysis 

This decision demonstrates the Court’s commitment to moving towards transparency but highlights uncertainty about how such applications should be dealt with. Whilst Ms Justice Harris’ judgement helpfully highlighted case law that supports the court’s powers under its inherit jurisdiction to permit publication about proceedings by a party, the basis of this authority has been described as ‘somewhat unclear' [2].

It was recognised by Miss Justice Harris that the inability of a survivor of domestic abuse and rape to speak openly about their experiences of the family justice system, only serves to exacerbate their traumatic experiences [3]. It has been an integral principle of our justice system and democracy to ensure open justice; yet the confidentiality of family proceedings has always tended to sit discordant with this. 

Following the success of the transparency reporting pilot that took place in 2023 we continue to see a notable shift toward greater transparency. The judgement of Miss Justice Harris in this case arguably moves us further along toward open justice in the family courts as we enter 2026