His Honour Judge Edward Hess, sitting in the Central Family Court, has today handed down his public judgment in financial remedies proceedings between Kyle Walker and Lauryn Goodman. Kyle Walker is a high-profile professional footballer who has four children with his wife (Ms Kilner, who was not a party to these proceedings), and two children with Lauryn Goodman, an influencer with whom Kyle Walker had a previous relationship.
At the outset of the two-day financial remedies proceedings, three journalists (from the Daily Mail, the Sun, and the Press Association) requested to attend the hearing. The judge followed the procedures set out in the ‘Transparency Reporting Pilot for Financial Remedy Proceedings’ introduced on 29 January 2024. The judge made an interim transparency order, which restricted what could be reported during the course of the hearing, and sought submissions on the terms of the final transparency order to be heard at the conclusion of the hearing.
On 17 July 2024, the judge heard submissions from Associated Newspapers, and counsel for the parties, on the terms of the final transparency order.
Associated Newspapers argued that the final transparency order should permit the media to publish (with a few targeted exceptions) information about the proceedings, including the judgment, without redaction or anonymisation of the parties.
The judge recognised that it is “quite rare” for a judge in a financial remedies case to reach a clear conclusion that the normal confidentiality restrictions should be dispensed with and that the judgment should be publicly reported upon.
The judge agreed with Associated Newspapers’ submission that it would be a “nonsense, opening the court to ridicule”, to prevent identification of the parties in these proceedings.
The judge concluded that the right of the press to scrutinise and comment upon the court’s procedures and decisions, and what the mother has requested of the father and how he has responded, were on this occasion “a greater priority”.
He said: “It is in my view preferable that anybody interested in the topic should have the opportunity to read the full independent account contained in this judgment before reaching any conclusion about what has happened.”
Accordingly, the judge made a Final Transparency Order which, save for a few targeted items, “does not interfere with the wishes of the process to publish such material as they wish.”
The judge’s decision on the transparency matters is in paragraphs 85-96 of the judgment, which can be found here.
The story was reported in the Daily Mail and The Sun.
5RB’s Gemma McNeil-Walsh acted on behalf of Associated Newspapers.