ACO -v- Birmingham City Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2026-BHM-000011

In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court

15 January 2026

Before:

HHJ Richard Williams

Between:

THE KING on the application of ACO

-v-

Birmingham City Council

Order

On an application by the Claimant for urgent consideration and interim relief

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by HHJ Richard Williams sitting as a Judge of the High Court

  1. Anonymity:
    a) Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998:
    i) the Claimant’s name is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and
    ii) the Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as “[INSERT ACO CIPHER]”.
    b) Pursuant to s. 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant and her children of any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant and her children in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.
    c) Pursuant to CPR 5.4C(4):
    i) the parties must within 7 days file and serve a redacted copy of any statement of case already filed, omitting the name, address and any other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant and her children;
    ii) if any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant and her children, a redacted copy omitting that information must be filed at the same time and must then be served with the unredacted version;
    iii) unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party many obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.
    d) Any person wishing to vary or discharge this Order must make an application, served on each party.
  2. Mandatory injunction:
    a) By 4pm 19 January 2026, the Defendant must secure suitable interim accommodation for the Claimant pending the outcome of these proceedings or further order.
    b) If requested, the Defendant must arrange/facilitate transport to enable the Claimant to get to the interim accommodation.
    c) The Defendant may apply to vary or discharge paragraph 2(a) above, any such application to be served on each party.

***THIS IS A MANDATORY INJUNCTION. IT MUST BE COMPLIED WITH UNLESS AND UNTIL IT IS SET ASIDE BY A COURT, EVEN IF AN APPLICATION TO VARY OR DISCHARGE IT HAS BEEN MADE UNDER PARAGRAPH 2(c) ABOVE. BREACH MAY GIVE RISE TO PROCEEDINGS FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT. SEE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT JUDICIAL REVIEW GUIDE 2024, §17.7.4***

REASONS

Anonymity: The claim concerns the Claimants’ minor children and their medical needs. [.

Mandatory injunction: The risk of irremediable harm lies in favour of granting the interim injunction.

C’s child is due to undergo bladder reconstructive surgery on 20 January 2026. In a letter dated 12 November 2025, the child’s treating hospital confirmed that “[the child] urgently needs a more suitable, accessible home… to ensure his safety and aid recovery post op so his medical needs can be met at home by his family….[the child’s] current housing situation poses serious concerns post reconstructive bladder surgery particularly in the period following surgery”.

By email dated 17 December 2025, D confirmed that it was “actively seeking interim accommodation…and is endeavouring to secure such accommodation commencing this evening.”