The woman gave evidence in court in the trial of a former partner who had admitted assaulting her, and her name and address was subsequently included in a report of proceedings published by Co Monaghan newspaper The Northern Standard.

In a letter to the editor of the newspaper, the woman said she had been led to believe that “under no circumstances could either party in this case be named in any newspaper due to it being a domestic violence case”.

The journalist who wrote the article responded to clarify that the case had taken place in the normal criminal courts, where the names of defendants and victims “are regularly reported”.

He said he was under no “privacy obligation”, but if he had known that the victim had serious concern about being identified, “that would of course be taken into consideration”.

The woman responded and said she had been informed that the case in which she gave her evidence had been a family law case, governed by the privacy rules of the family courts.

She made a formal complaint to the non-statutory Office of the Press Ombudsman, stating that The Northern Standard had breached Principle 5 (Privacy) of the Code of Practice of the Press Council of Ireland by publishing her full name and full address in its report of the court case.

As a result of the report of the court case, the woman said she had suffered stress and anxiety “caused by everyone knowing about my private life”.

Setting out his decision, Press Ombudsman Peter Feeney said: “In this particular case, it appears that the complainant received information which was incorrect. This clearly compounded the shock she experienced when she read in The Northern Standard the report of the case where she gave evidence.

“The editor of The Northern Standard in his submission emphasises the important role newspapers play in the public seeing that justice is done whilst acknowledging that in exceptional circumstances the newspaper may withhold information.

“However, in the preparation of the report that led to this complaint no representations were made about the witness’s desire to not have her name published.

“Therefore, The Northern Standard could not have known any special circumstances that the newspaper might need to take into consideration before publishing the name and address of the witness. I find there was no breach of Principle 5.”