P’s mother (M) was on a short visit to this country from Italy in June 2012 when she had what she described as a panic attack and was detained pursuant to section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983. She was pregnant, and the NHS Trust applied to Mostyn J sitting in the Court of Protection for the performance of a caesarean section using restraint if necessary. He granted the application and gave reasons in an ex tempore judgment on 23 August 2012, Re AA  EWHC 4378 (COP).
P was born by caesarean section on 24 August 2012, the Applicant County Council (“A”) began care proceedings the next day. P was placed in foster care and was eventually the subject of a care order and a placement order, the Council was then given leave to place P for adoption. Until 1 December 2013, none of this information was in the public domain.
On 1 December 2013 accounts of the case were printed in the newspapers and extensive media coverage ensued. The Judge ordered that any further applications were to be heard by him in the High Court and issued a statement to that effect. There was inaccurate coverage of the order.
On 3 December, A made an application without notice seeking a reporting restriction order. This was refused and the Judge authorised the publication of a statement that it had been, and that he would hear an application on notice. On 4 December the Council renewed its application and the Judge sent a message to A noting defects in its Checklist for the application.
That application came before Charles J on 4 December 2012 who granted a more limited injunction than that sought by A (Re P  EWHC 4383 (Fam)) to run until 13 December 2013. Later on the same day Mostyn J ordered publication of the judgment of 23 August 2012.
There was no application on behalf of M or the Italian Authorities. The instant application, before the court on 13 December, was a renewal of the one made by A on 4 December 2013 for a reporting restriction order. Before the hearing Associated Newspapers Limited, who had been represented at the hearing of 4 December 2012, agreed an appropriate form of order with A.
Before turning to the substance of the application, the Judge surveyed the extensive media coverage of the case, emphasising the three key principles he set out in Re J (A Child)  EWHC 2694 (Fam) at -.