Claim No: CO/04388/2022
In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
24 November 2022
The Honourable Mr Justice Ritchie
The King on the application of AB
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Before the Honourable Mr Justice Ritchie sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, the Strand, London on 23rd November 2022.
Upon reading the Claimant’s application dated 23rd November 2022 for urgent consideration and for interim relief and the bundle served with it.
And Upon the Defendant having determined on 29 September 2022 that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the Claimant may a victim of modern slavery/trafficking and informing the Claimant that he could access support for accommodation.
And Upon noting that the Claimant has been street homeless from 7th November 2022.
And Upon noting that the Salvation Army wrote by email to the Defendant on 16 November 2022 asking for migrant accommodation for the Claimant under S.98 of the Immigration Act 1999 (IA 99) because the Claimant had no accommodation.
And Upon the court noting that the Claimant requested S.98 IA99 accommodation from the Defendant on 22 November 2022.
And Upon the Court being informed that a letter before action was served on the Defendant on 23rd November 2022 in the morning and that no response has been received by the Claimant’s lawyers from the Defendant.
And Within the Claimant’s claim for judicial review issued on 23rd November 2022 of the decision of the Defendant made on 16.11.2022 (as yet unissued).
And Upon the Court being informed that no response has been received from the Defendant to any of the above communications.
And Upon the court considering that there are reasonable grounds for the Claimant’s assertion that the Defendant has failed to comply with the duties imposed under ss.95 and 98 of the IA 1999 and The Asylum support, section 4(2): policy and process’ (Version 3, 28 June 2022) and the Allocation of Accommodation” (Version 7.0, 28 October 2022).
And Upon the Court considering that the balance of convenience is in favour of granting an injunction.
And Upon Considering an application for anonymity by the Claimant.
And Upon the Court considering that the Claimant is a vulnerable person.
And Upon: consideration of the Claimant’s Article 8 right to respect for private and family life and the Article 10 right to freedom of expression;
And Upon It Appearing that non-disclosure of the identity of the Claimant is necessary in order to protect the interests of the Claimant.
And Pursuant to rule 39.2(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules and section II of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and rules 5.4C and 5.4D of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Identity and address
1. That the identity of the Claimant shall not be disclosed.
2. That reporting restrictions apply as to the disclosing of any information that may lead to the subsequent identification of the Claimant. The publication of the name and address of the Claimant is prohibited.
Documents filed in future
3. That the names of Claimant shall be described in all statements of case and other documents to be filed or served in the proceedings in future and in any judgment or order in the proceedings and in any report of the proceedings by the press or otherwise as “AB”.
4. That the address of the Claimant shall be stated in all statements of case and other documents to be filed or served in the proceedings as the address of the Claimant’s solicitors.
5. That in so far as necessary, any statement of case or other document disclosing the Claimant’s name or address already filed in the proceedings shall be replaced by a document describing such name or address in anonymised form as above.
6. That the original of any such document disclosing the name or address of the Claimant placed on the Court file (digital or paper) shall be marked “confidential: not to be opened without the permission of a Master or High Court Judge”.
7. That a non-party may not inspect or obtain a copy of any document on or from the Court’s paper or digital files (other than this order duly anonymised as directed) without the permission of a Master or District Judge. Any application for such permission must be made on 14 days notice to the Claimant’s solicitor and the Court will effect service.
8. The Court’s paper and digital files are to be marked “subject to an Anonymity Order”.
It Is Also Hereby Ordered That:
- The Defendant shall provide or arrange for the provision of safe accommodation for the Claimant in London (zones 1-6) commencing no later than 5 pm on 24th November 2022 and continuing until the end of the hearing of the return date for this injunction or further order.
- Liberty to the Defendant to apply on 2 working days notice to set aside or vary this order.
- Any application made under paragraph 2 is to be referred to a High Court Judge or a deputy High Court judge for consideration within 3 days of issue.
- The return date for the consideration of this injunction shall be listed on the first open date after 30th November 2022 for 2 hours. Any evidence or submissions which are to be relied upon by the Defendant or the Interested Party at that hearing shall be filed and served no less than 3 working days before the hearing.
- The Defendant shall file and serve an acknowledgement of service setting out the position taken by the Defendant on the provision of accommodation by 4pm on Friday 25th November 2022.
- Costs in the case.
This is a mandatory injunction. Breach of paragraph 1 this order may give rise to contempt proceedings. Even if an application has been made under paragraph 2 to vary or discharge, the order at paragraph 1 must be complied with unless or until such an order is made.
- It is unsafe for the Claimant to be homeless and the Defendant does not appear to have responded to the request for accommodation made in the relevant sections of the IA99.