W v M (TOLATA Proceedings: Anonymity)

Richard Todd QC and John Wilson QC (instructed by Manches Solicitors) for the Claimant/Applicant John Martin QC and Rebecca Bailey-Harris (instructed by Miles Preston & Co Solicitors) for the Defendant/Respondent Hearing dates: 12 � 14 June 2012 ____________________

The press were not represented at the hearing. It must be reasonably speculated that this was because they did not have sufficient time to arrange representation. I do not regard 105 minutes' notice as sufficient to comply with s12(3)(a) of the 1998 Act, even though I must accept some responsibility for it in the light of remarks made by me on this topic at the PTR.

Therefore, once another interest protected by the law comes into play (by which I mean is positively proved, rather than merely asserted) then a fact-specific balancing exercise has to be undertaken.

A very recent example of the conduct of the balancing exercise is the comprehensive decision of Tugendhat J in Trimingham v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2012] EWHC 1296 (QB) . I shall return to this decision in another context later.

i) a hearing relating to the parties' finances where the information being considered includes price sensitive information (such as confidential information which could affect the share price of a publicly quoted company); or