Spencers settle to avoid spectacle?

Last week Earl Spencer and his wife reached an agreement over the division of assets in their long running divorce. Reports suggest that it was a deal done at the eleventh hour to avoid their final hearing being played out in front of the media.

Only hours before the agreement was reached, a judge had refused a joint application to exclude the media from the hearing.

As set out in previous blogs, the media are now entitled to attend hearings in relation to family matters unless in specific circumstances. At the time the new rules came out, it had been speculated that the presence of the media may serve to put pressure on couples to settle. This may be the first high profile example of the impact of the new rules.

Many cases do settle "on the steps" of the court before such hearings but it seems the potential presence of the media at the hearing pushed this high profile pair to take that final step towards agreement.

The barristers acting for the pair had made joint submissions to the judge asking for an order excluding the media. They argued that the only reason the media was interested in the case was because of the parties' profile and that if they had not been in the public eye the media would have had no interest in the case.

The judge stated that it would be “potentially dangerous, very dangerous, territory……. to privilege one group of the community – those who attract the attention of the media – over and above another group who do not”.

He duly refused to exclude the media. Shortly after, the Spencers settled.

At first glance, this may seem only relevant to those with celebrity status. However, the judge went on to say:  

"I cannot believe that it is consistent either with the legislative intent which lay behind the change in the Rules nor consistent with the Rules themselves that the media should, as a matter of generality, be excluded from ancillary relief cases."