Rubric and Content warnings formatting
As part of the publication process, the TNA publication team check whether a rubric is present on the front sheet of the judgment.
Standard rubric wording within Family Proceedings
Within family proceedings, the content of the rubric can be varied but tends to contain the following standard wording:
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the incapacitated person/ [child] and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court
The editorial team will read the terms of the rubric and check that the judgment complies with any restrictions. For example, the rubric may contain the standard wording or be varied to cover specific requirements such as the redaction of expert witness details or addresses. The editorial team will contact the uploader if they are in any doubt about content that may be contrary to the rubric or that may lead to the identification of parties anonymised by the rubric.
Examples of standard rubric wording with specific variations:
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published. In no report of these proceedings or this judgment may the addresses of the persons referred to as Amy, Denise, Bridget and Pieter be given. All persons including representatives of the media must strictly comply with this condition breach of which will be a contempt of court. There are no other reporting restrictions. – [2022] EWFC 142
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that in any report of, or commentary on, the judgment the children shall not be named or photographs of them displayed. This prohibition applies notwithstanding that their father and their late mother are named in the judgment. It mirrors the convention used at the sentencing hearing referred to in the judgment. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court pursuant to sec 12 Administration of Justice Act 1960. – [2022] EWFC 66
Non-Standard Rubric Wording
Occasionally judgments and decisions are received containing the following wording:
This decision was delivered in private to the parties and their lawyers. They may not show or otherwise communicate this decision or its contents to any other person. Any party or their lawyers wishing to show or inform any other person about the decision or any other person wishing to see the decision must first come back to court and obtain the permission of [their] Honour XXX
We understand that this is the standard wording used before publication, where the draft judgment is shared with the legal representatives directly involved.
If this is present, the editorial team will check with the uploader that it is acceptable to publish in its current form, and the uploader may choose to publish as-is or upload an amended version. We would ask that uploader remove this warning if no longer relevant, as publication will be delayed while we contact the relevant uploader to confirm that the judgment or decision can be published.
Shorter Rubric Statements
Some judgments and decisions contain a shorter rubric statement:
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published. In this instance, the team will confirm that the party names have been referenced within the judgment in a way that is consistent with the front sheet. The team will check that any parties that are anonymised on the front sheet are consistently anonymised throughout the judgment.
Specific warnings
Other proceedings may contain a specific warning within the front sheet.
The provisions of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply. Accordingly no matter relating to the complainant shall during her lifetime be included in any publication if it is likely to lead members of the public to identify her as the victim of this offence. This prohibition applies unless it is waived or lifted in accordance with s.3 of the Act. In the light of the relationship between the appellant and the complainant, the Court has directed that he be anonymised in any report of the judgment. – [2022] EWCA Crim 1523
An anonymity order has been made in respect of the appellant who is referred to as BXR, which will remain in place throughout his lifetime. During that period no report may be published which may lead to his identification. – [2022] EWCA Crim 1483
The provisions of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply to this offence. – [2022] EWCA Crim 1111
The editorial team will do their best to check that any anonymity restrictions applied to these documents have been done so consistently throughout the judgment or decision. Additionally, the team will contact the uploader if they identify any possible inconsistencies to confirm with the uploader whether the document can be published in its current form.
General Warnings – (Warnings contained within transcribed judgments/decisions)
Judgments and decisions may contain a general warning which may or may not be relevant to that specific judgment/decision – see example wording below. This general warning tends to be found more frequently within transcribed judgments/decisions. If possible, please remove this general warning if it is not applicable to the specific judgment/decision. Where this warning is present, the editorial team will complete closer checks to ensure that the warning is complied with, and this will create delays in publication to the Find Case Law site.
WARNING: reporting restrictions may apply to the contents transcribed in this document, particularly if the case concerned a sexual offence or involved a child. Reporting restrictions prohibit the publication of the applicable information to the public or any section of the public, in writing, in a broadcast or by means of the internet, including social media. Anyone who receives a copy of this transcript is responsible in law for making sure that applicable restrictions are not breached. A person who breaches a reporting restriction is liable to a fine and/or imprisonment. For guidance on whether reporting restrictions apply, and to what information, ask at the court office or take legal advice.
Judgments Containing No Rubric
Where a judgment/decision has been redacted in some way, whether that is party names, addresses or witnesses, the editorial team will check to ensure that any redactions have been applied consistently within the judgment/decision.
While not checking overarching anonymity requirements, the team does have an awareness of general issues, including: the need to provide anonymity for victims or potential victims of sexual offences; trafficking; female genital mutilation; anonymity of children subject to family proceedings; children subject to proceedings within the youth court, and criminal retrials. Occasionally, the editorial team may contact the uploader if they have any queries relating to these matters to seek confirmation that the judgment or decision is for publication in its current form as a matter of caution.