The Milford Mercury won a victory for press freedom when it successfully appealed against a reporting restriction that prevented it naming a drunken mother who pleaded guilty to child cruelty.

The Mercury had to draft a letter explaining how the decision conflicted with case law and judicial guidance.

The paper appealed to the court because it felt the ban affected the public’s right to open justice and the child was too young to be adversely affected by publication.

The court has to give a good reason when it imposes a such a restriction, a ban which should not be used automatically in every case where a child is involved.

Editor Simon Carr said: “Reporting restrictions are imposed far too often and it impedes the reporter’s duty to report facts to the public and adversely affects the public’s right to open justice.

“In cases such as this one imposing a restriction against naming the child actually protects the parents.

“It is easy to forget that these orders should only be made with a good reason and certainly not as a matter of course.

“If a child is too young to be affected by publication magistrates should not be imposing orders willy-nilly.

“They need to know what order they are making, what good reason they have for imposing it and ensure that it is put into writing.”

The head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Ken McDonald, recently stressed the importance of using these restrictions wisely when he stated that the CPS would back reporters who launched appeals in the benefit of open justice.