'I welcome increased openness unreservedly': Supreme Court judge's praise for Mail's open justice fight

One of the country’s most senior judges has praised the Daily Mail for exposing the secret jailing of a woman for trying to take her father out of a care home.
In April, the Mail exclusively revealed that 50-year-old Wanda Maddocks had been sentenced to five months in jail by the Court of Protection – the secretive court that controls the affairs of those who are too ill to make their own decisions.
Lord Neuberger, the president of the Supreme Court, ‘applauded’ the reporting of the case. He said it had resulted in increased openness in the courts which he welcomed ‘without reservation’.

Praise: Lord Neuberger, left, praised the Mail for exposing the case of Wanda Maddocks, right, who was jailed for trying take her father out of a care home

Exposure: The Mail's headline when it exclusively ran Miss Maddocks's story

She had not been present in court and was not represented by a lawyer when the judgment was made. The case – which was not made public for months – led to a furious row over justice carried out behind closed doors in the Court of Protection.
Miss Maddocks served six weeks in Foston Hall – the women’s jail in Derbyshire which was home to Maxine Carr, girlfriend of Soham killer Ian Huntley.

Caring: Miss Maddocks was arrested at the care home of her father John, pictured

Lord Neuberger said: ‘I think that one of the important functions of an open society is that the Press and media remind us sometimes of the need to examine our practices and to see whether we do comply as much as we should with the need for open justice.
‘And I think some of the campaigns – while not always well conceived or entirely right in all respects – for improving open justice in the courts are to be applauded.’
Asked about the case of Miss Maddocks, he said that anything that supports openness in terms of hearings was to be applauded, while the need for secrecy had to be justified in every case.
‘The short answer is if you are saying that this case has resulted – which it has done – in increased openness then one welcomes it without reservation,’ he said.
Miss Maddocks was not in court – and not represented by a lawyer – when a judge ruled that her attempt to remove her 80-year-old father from the home amounted to wilful defiance of the court and ordered her to be jailed.
But no record of the judgment was published and secrecy rules barred the naming of Miss Maddocks, her father, the council that brought the case and the social worker who gave evidence against her.
Judge Martin Cardinal, sitting in Birmingham last August, opened his court to the public for sentencing, but the unlocking of the courtroom doors was announced only to passers-by in the corridor outside.

Happier times: John Maddocks pictured with his daughter Wanda on a family holiday in Turkey

The Mail’s reporting of the case prompted senior judges to ban the secret jailing of defendants for contempt of court.
Lord Neuberger also talked more generally about the need to avoid courts operating in closed session.

Last year the Mail campaigned against an extension of secret courts in civil hearings, which resulted in the Government’s proposals being watered down significantly.
Speaking yesterday at the start of the legal year, Lord Neuberger said: ‘We should try to minimise the extent of when it is necessary to go in to closed session and do everything we can to ensure that the consequences of going in to closed session are mitigated.’
When Miss Maddocks’ case became public, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling wrote to Sir James Munby, the judge in charge of family justice, asking him to include the Court of Protection in a review of the family courts – which are rarely  open to the public and usually publish only anonymous details of judgments.
Miss Maddocks was jailed after the court heard she had repeatedly broken orders not to interfere with her father’s life at the care home.
Her family said Mr Maddocks, a retired painter and decorator from Stoke-on-Trent, had been held ‘like a prisoner’ on the orders of a local council. He has since died.
The judge said Miss Maddocks  had ‘the attitude of someone who is simply not going to obey court orders’.
She was arrested 11 days after her sentencing by police and court officials and served six weeks before being released after apologising to the judge.
It was only when the Mail learned of the case that the judge agreed that Miss Maddocks and her brother Ivan could be named, along with  the council, Stoke-on-Trent.
He was given a suspended sentence for his role in taking their father to a court hearing and to see a Birmingham lawyer.
The judgment in which the sentence was handed down was also published for the first time.
Lord Neuberger repeated his criticisms of proposed cuts to legal aid and stated his opposition to new limits on judicial review applications.