Sara Sharif Judges to be Named – Court of Appeal Delivers Stinging Judgment
Tickle & Anor v The BBC & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 42
Avaia Williams, a first six pupil under the supervision of Sara Anning and Rebecca Musgrove, summarises the Court of Appeal judgment in Tickle & Anor v The BBC & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 42, the appeal concerning whether the historic judges involved in Sara Sharif’s family proceedings should be named.
The background to the matter concerns the tragic circumstances of the murder of Sara Sharif by her father and step-mother. Following her murder, several journalists sought information from the family proceedings and accordingly applied to the court for this disclosure.
A vast amount of material was disclosed, however, in making this order, Mr Justice Williams unilaterally made an order that the judges who had previously been involved in proceedings must not be named. This focused mainly on the Article 8 rights of the judges.
The decision was quickly appealed, and the decision, the first of its kind, was considered by the Court of Appeal who, in delivering a stinging and critical judgment, found that:
“…the judge had no jurisdiction to anonymise the historic judges either on 9 December 2024 or thereafter. He was wrong to do so…”
The Master of the Rolls further explained that:
“…He knew he had no evidence, and he could have realised that the judges would not wish to provide any evidence (as has happened). In short, the whole idea of anonymising the judges was, I have to say, misguided.”
The judgment is a significant moment in reaffirming the principle of open justice, particularly within the context of the family courts, still known for their overarching secrecy. The Court of Appeal’s decision emphasises the constitutional importance of transparency and accountability in judicial proceedings.
For the full summary and commentary, visit Family Law Week.
The full judgment is available on BAILII.
