When is it appropriate for the media to report financial details of a divorce? This question was addressed by Mr Justice Mostyn of the High Court recently in relation to the divorce between Nicole Appleton and Liam Gallagher.
In his judgment, Mostyn J observed that “to say that the law about the ability of the press to report ancillary relief proceedings which they are allowed to observe is a mess would be a serious understatement”. The Family Procedure Rules state that financial remedy hearings, where the court decides how to split the money and property of a divorced couple, should be private but allow journalists to attend. Beyond this, the current law does not make it clear when the right of the public to know and understand what is happening in courts funded by tax payers trumps the right of the divorcing couple who want to keep their personal details private.
Mostyn J’s view is that journalists may attend hearings but their reporting must not identify the names and locations of the parties or reveal any of their financial information, save to the extent the information is already in the public domain. Whilst the risk of information being reported might put pressure on a party to settle, it may also have the effect of preventing open disclosure of financial information within proceedings. Given the effectiveness of financial remedy proceedings depends greatly on both parties being completely open and honest about their financial position, this is a serious consideration.
The alternative for wealthy, well-known couples who are divorcing is to settle their finances outside of the court. Various options are available including mediation and arbitration as well as the traditional approach of negotiating through lawyers. Whilst most cases settle outside of court, there will always be a minority of protracted cases, which won’t. In these circumstances thought has to be given to what steps can be taken to protect the privacy of high profile clients who might be of interest to the public.
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.
Related insights
Celebrating International Women’s Day 2026 and its powerful #GiveToGain theme
Debenhams Ottaway is proud to celebrate International Women’s Day 2026, a moment to recognise the extraordinary women who shape our firm, our profession and our local business community. As a…
Read more-
Debenhams Ottaway is delighted to share that managing partner Susan Glenholme has been appointed the new President of the St Albans District Chamber of Commerce, stepping into the role with…
Read more Supreme Court landmark ruling reshapes unfair prejudice shareholder disputes
The Supreme Court has delivered an important judgment in THG plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd, confirming that petitions under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 are not…
Read moreSupreme Court ruling strengthens liquidators’ claims in Mitchell v Al Jaber
The decision of the Supreme Court in Mitchell v Sheikh Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber strengthens liquidators’ ability to pursue equitable compensation against directors for breach of their fiduciary duties….
Read moreFamily Mediation Week 2026: A Smarter Way to Navigate Divorce
Family Mediation Week shines a spotlight on mediation as a practical, forward-focused alternative to court during separation and divorce. For many couples facing divorce, mediation offers a way to resolve…
Read more