As reported on Hold the Front Page last week, the chief coroner, His Honour Judge Peter Thornton QC has issued new guidance concerning the relationship between the media and the coroners’ court.

The guidance states that its purpose is to “help coroners in all aspects of their work which concerns the media…with a view to providing greater consistency of approach across England and Wales.”

Although nothing fundamentally new has been revealed, the guidance is likely to provide assistance to journalists UK-wide who in the past may have struggled with the varying approaches taken by some coroners to issues of media liaison.

The two main points to note from the guidance are:

• As we all know, the rules concerning media access to documents used in inquest proceedings differ from those concerning criminal proceedings. Whereas in criminal proceedings, there is an entitlement for members of the press to obtain items of evidence used in open court (subject to a number of caveats), the position has always been less definitive in relation to evidential material used in inquest proceedings.

The new guidance confirms that the coroner should normally grant a request from the press for access to a specified document unless there is a compelling reason to decline. According to the guidance, what constitutes a “compelling reason” can be anything from the avoidance of prejudice to future investigations to the protection of the privacy rights of those identified in the material.

Importantly, the guidance provides written confirmation that the presumption should always be in favour of disclosure in the first instance, subject to an explanation of the countervailing reasons for refusal.

• Similarly, the application of reporting restrictions concerning inquest proceedings has been murky in the past. We all know that reporting of legal proceedings, including inquests, is to be done in a fair and accurate manner in accordance with general libel principles but what has always been less clear is the extent of the power of a coroner to impose restrictions on the reporting of a case.

The guidance confirms that any restriction imposed should be lawful, necessary and proportionate and where possible, advance notice of the intention to make such a restriction should be given at the pre-inquest review to allow the opportunity for the media to make representations (though it is noted that in some cases it may be appropriate for a coroner to simply invite the press not to report certain details).

Our old friend section 39 also gets a special mention in the guidance. Although S.39 no longer applies to the criminal courts, the guidance helpfully confirms that whilst s.39 can be used in relation to children concerned in inquest proceedings (because they are civil in nature), it does not extend to children who are deceased, and any order made under this legislation will expire on the subject’s 18th birthday.

There are a number of other, more minor points arising from the guidance concerning issues such as access to hearings and electronic communications from within the court room. These are of course, things that most people will already have been aware of, but again, it is useful to have these points reduced to writing by the coroners court itself.

The publication of this guidance is a positive step as it represents something physical that can be relied upon in circumstances where a coroner may not appear to be playing by the rules.

So, the take home message for today is that this guidance (to be found at https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/guidance-no-25-coroners-and-the-media.pdf) is another essential item to be kept in any court reporter’s toolkit.