THE identity of a convicted sex offender banned from going near children cannot be revealed after magistrates rejected an application from the Chronicle to name him.

The 34-year-old Winsford man appeared before Vale Royal Magistrates Court on Monday to have an interim Sexual Offences Prevention Order extended.

He will return to the court on January 24, when it will be decided whether a full order will be made against him.

An order made under the Contempt of Court Act banning the Press from naming him was upheld, despite a legal challenge from the Chronicle.

We argued the man, who was convicted of indecent assault on a male under the age of 16 in 2002, represented a danger to the public and that legislation was in place to protect the victim - not the offender. It was argued that naming him would not reveal the identity of his victim.

The man, who was not represented at court, told magistrates he feared for his safety if his name was released.

Magistrates rejected the legal challenge and opted to keep the original order in place.

They also extended the interim Sexual Offences Prevention Order made against him until his next court appearance.

It bans him from being in the company of anyone under the age of 17, unless they are accompanied by their parents or guardians. The man has been warned he faces up to five years in jail if he goes near parks or play areas or breaches the order.

There are five conditions imposed within the order, which prohibit the man:

From talking to or being in the company of any young person under the age of 17, except when they are in the company of their parent or legal guardian without reasonable excuse.

From being in any house where there is a young person under the age of 17 without reasonable excuse.

From allowing any young person under the age of 17 into his house.

From loitering or being within 100 metres of any public park or play area.

From undertaking any paid or unpaid voluntary work which would bring him into contact with children.

Police imposed the order to have greater control over the man's movements. He is considered a high risk to the public.