Summary

In her judgment on X and Y (Care Proceedings: Fact Finding: Death of a Child), the Judge was highly critical of the evidence and conduct during proceedings of one of the expert witnesses, a consultant neurosurgeon, Mr M. This judgment, which should be read alongside the earlier judgment, dealt with whether Mr M should be named within that published judgment.

Learning points

• An expert witness, opposing publication of their name in a judgment, will probably need to demonstrate that it would represent a disproportionate intrusion into their private and family life to convince the court to strike the balance between articles 8 and 10 of the ECHR in their favour and against the wider public interest.   

• In the family court, an expert might be able to demonstrate such a disproportionate intrusion if they can show a history or risk of harassment or a threat to their safety.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login