TKA & Ors v XKA & Ors

Where evidence indicates that giving notice may defeat the purpose of proceedings, the court may grant interim injunctions without notice. Restrictions on open justice, including a private hearing and anonymity, may be justified where necessary to protect children and prevent proceedings being frustrated by publicity. A settlement concerning children requires the court’s approval under CPR Part 21.

The claim was brought by members of two families following an incident involving two young children. The claimants alleged harassment and misuse of their children’s private information, and sought injunctions under the Protection from Harassment Act and related relief restraining disclosure.

Interim injunctions were granted without notice on 8 June 2012. At the return hearing on 22 June 2012, the parties agreed a final settlement, gave undertakings to the court, and sought approval of the settlement insofar as it concerned the children.

1. On the evidence, the defendants’ conduct was sufficiently unreasonable that giving notice of the original application appeared to create a real risk of defeating the purpose of the proceedings. Interim injunctions were therefore granted without notice.
2. The derogations from open justice, including anonymity and a hearing in private, were necessary to protect the interests of the children and because publicity would have defeated the purpose of the proceedings.
3. The parties’ final settlement was recorded in an order dated 22 June 2012. The court approved it under CPR Part 21 insofar as it related to the children.
4. There was no evidence or suggestion of any public interest in further disclosure of the information concerned.

First instance decision. The parties reached a final settlement at the return hearing on 22 June 2012.