THE principle of open justice is what our legal system is based around.

This is the idea the public and the press can follow court proceedings to ensure things are done in a fair way for defendant and victim.

As a result, the testimonies of witnesses should be reported to show how justice is being done.

This principle has existed since our legal system was first devised.

So the Supreme Court’s decision regarding Tariq Khuja is an extremely important one.

He had been arrested and, although never charged, was named by a witness during the notorious Bullfinch trial.

However, Mr Khuja fought to keep his name out of the public domain, something this paper, along with The Times, felt went against this key principle.

Using his wealth, he battled this paper all the way to the Supreme Court.

Fortunately, five of the seven judges agreed with the Oxford Mail, which is why we can name him today.

This is a major victory and significantly strengthens the principle of open justice.

Had Mr Khuja won, it could have opened the door for others to keep their names from being reported in relation to court proceedings.

The result would have been partial open justice – a dangerous path to go down.