Privacy for children in proceedings – CA 1989 s. 97
Publishing material identifying a child in family court proceedings under CA 1989 or ACA 2002 is an offence. Defence: no knowledge. Fine level 4.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No person shall publish to the public at large or any section of the public any material which is intended, or likely, to identify— any child as being involved in any proceedings before the High Court or the family court in which any power under this Act or the Adoption and Children Act 2002 may be exercised by the court with respect to that or any other child; or an address or school as being that of a child involved in any such proceedings. In any proceedings for an offence under this section it shall be a defence for the accused to prove that he did not know, and had no reason to suspect, that the published material was intended, or likely, to identify the child. The court or the Lord Chancellor may, if satisfied that the welfare of the child requires it and, in the case of the Lord Chancellor, if the Lord Chief Justice agrees , by order dispense with the requirements of subsection (2) to such extent as may be specified in the order. For the purposes of this section— “ publish ” includes— include in a programme service (within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1990); cause to be published; and “ material ” includes any picture or representation. Any person who contravenes this section shall be guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale. It is not a contravention of this section to— enter material in the Adoption and Children Act Register (established under section 125 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002), or permit persons to search and inspect that register pursuant to regulations made under section 128A of that Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Lord Chief Justice may nominate a judicial office holder (as defined in section 109(4) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005) to exercise his functions under subsection (4).
Text in force at .
Source: legislation.gov.uk — The National Archives (legislation.gov.uk), reproduced under licence Open Government Licence v3.0.
What it actually says
This section makes it an offence to publish any material that is intended or likely to identify a child involved in proceedings before the High Court or the family court, where a power under the Children Act 1989 or the Adoption and Children Act 2002 may be exercised. “Publish” includes broadcasting and causing publication; “material” includes pictures and representations.
A person accused of the offence can defend themselves by proving they did not know and had no reason to suspect that the published material would identify the child. The court or the Lord Chancellor (with the Lord Chief Justice’s agreement) may order that the restriction be lifted if the child’s welfare requires it.
The penalty on summary conviction is a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale. There is an exception for entering material in the Adoption and Children Act Register or allowing searches of that register.
When it applies
- A newspaper publishes the name and school of a child in a report about a care proceedings hearing.
- A person posts a photo of a child on social media with a caption referencing a contested adoption case.
- A blogger writes an article naming a child and their address in connection with a family court dispute over custody.
- A TV programme includes footage that shows a child’s face and mentions their involvement in a supervision order application.
What this section does not say
- Publishing information about a child in criminal proceedings (not family court under these Acts).
- Naming a child in a private family argument that has not been brought to court.
- Identifying a child in a story that is unrelated to any court proceedings, even if the child is otherwise known.
That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.
Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the Acts of Parliament that apply in England and Wales.
Or open a session directly and invite the other party.
We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.
This page reproduces the text of CA 1989 s. 97 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in England and Wales.