R (C) v SSJ (2014) EWCA Civ 1009: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 22:00, 15 March 2023

Anonymity The Administrative Court had not been wrong to refuse the patient an anonymity order in relation to his judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision about unescorted community leave.

Note

This judgment was finally published in 2023 after the Supreme Court secretariat had been asked about it for several years.

External links

Guardian, 'Murderer not entitled to remain anonymous while seeking rehabilitation' (Press Association, 16/7/14)

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII

Subject(s):

Anonymisation cases🔍

Date: 16/7/14🔍

Court: Court of Appeal (Civil Division)🔍

Judicial history:

Judge(s):

Dyson🔍
Maurice Kay🔍
Floyd🔍

Parties:

X🔍
C🔍
Secretary of State for Justice🔍

Citation number(s):

[2014] EWCA Civ 1009^B
[2014] MHLO 90

What links here:

Published: 11/8/14 20:01

Cached: 2025-04-26 05:49:58

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-''The press has reported this case as follows: a restricted transferred prisoner patient in medium security judicially reviewed the Secretary of State's refusal to grant permission for unescorted community leave; Cranston J refused to make an anonymity order, a decision upheld by the Court of Appeal (Lord Dyson MR; Maurice Kay LJ, VP; Floyd LJ). It is understood that an appeal will be made to the Supreme Court.
+{{Case
+|Date=2014/07/16
-==External link==
+|NCN=[2014] EWCA Civ 1009
-{{bailii|no tran}}
+|Other citations=[2014] MHLO 90
+|Court=Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
-{{link|http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/16/murderer-not-entitled-remain-anonymous-seeking-rehabilitation|Guardian, 'Murderer not entitled to remain anonymous while seeking rehabilitation' (Press Association, 16/7/14)|s}}
+|Judges=Dyson, Maurice Kay, Floyd
+|Parties=X, C, Secretary of State for Justice
-[[Category:Miscellaneous]]
+|Judicial history first case=R (C) v SSJ (2014) EWHC 167 (Admin)
-[[Category:Brief summary]]
+|Sentence=Anonymity
-[[Category:No transcript]]
+|Summary=The Administrative Court had not been wrong to refuse the patient an anonymity order in relation to his judicial review of the Secretary of State's decision about unescorted community leave.
-[[Category:2014 cases]]
+|Detail===Note==
+This judgment was finally published in 2023 after the Supreme Court secretariat had been asked about it for several years.
+|External links=* {{link
+|url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/16/murderer-not-entitled-remain-anonymous-seeking-rehabilitation|
+|archive=https://web.archive.org/web/20141021091031/http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/16/murderer-not-entitled-remain-anonymous-seeking-rehabilitation
+|text=Guardian, 'Murderer not entitled to remain anonymous while seeking rehabilitation' (Press Association, 16/7/14)
+|saved=z}}
+|Subject=Anonymisation cases
+|News=Yes
+|RSS pubdate=2022/07/18 10:56:07 AM
+}}