AI -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)
Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order
Claim number: AC-2024-LON-002259
In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court
2 July 2024
Before:
The Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE
Between:
The King on the application of
AI
-v-
Secretary of State for the Home Department
(Port Ref: AIC/8099416)
Order
On the Claimant’s application for urgent consideration, interim relief, an anonymity order and directions;
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant;
Order by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE
1. Pursuant to CPR r.39.2, in any report of these proceedings, there shall be no publication of the name and address of the Claimant, nor any other particulars likely to lead to his identification. In the proceedings, the Claimant shall be anonymised and referred to as “AI”.
2. No later than 7 days after the date of service of this order, the Claimant’s solicitors shall file with the Court copies of case documents which have been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimant, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
3. Non-parties may not obtain any documents from the court file which have not been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimant, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
4. The Defendant is restrained from moving the Claimant from Southampton, or the nearby area, until the determination of the application for interim relief, or further order.
5. The Defendant do file and serve an Acknowledgment of Service and Summary Grounds of Resistance, including a response to the application for interim relief, no later than 7 days after service of the issued claim and supporting documents.
6. The Defendant do file and serve any documents in its possession relating to the Claimant and which are relevant to the claim, pursuant to the duty of candour, no later than 7 days after service of the issued claim and supporting documents.
7. The Claimant do file and serve a Reply, no later than 5 days after service of the Defendant’s documents, under paragraphs 5 and 6 above.
8. The application for interim relief and permission to apply for judicial review is to be considered by a Judge on the papers no later than 7 days after the filing of the Claimant’s Reply.
9. If an oral hearing is requested, the parties are to notify the Court as soon as possible.
10. Liberty to apply to vary or discharge this order on 5 days notice to the other party.
11. Costs reserved.
THIS IS AN INJUNCTION. BREACH OF PARAGRAPH 4 OF THIS ORDER MAY GIVE RISE TO CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS. EVEN IF AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE TO VARY OR DISCHARGE THIS ORDER, IT MUST BE COMPLIED WITH UNLESS OR UNTIL SUCH AN ORDER IS MADE.
Reasons
1. The Claimant is a national of Sudan who entered the UK without authorisation on 22 March 2024. He claimed asylum on 2 April 2024, on the grounds that he had been kidnapped and tortured by armed combatants.
2. The Defendant has granted him assistance under section 95 Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and he has been accommodated in Highfield House Hotel, Southampton. The Defendant now wishes to move him to Napier Barracks.
3. The Claimant is currently receiving medical treatment for significant physical and mental conditions, arising from his maltreatment in Sudan, and he has support from a local volunteer group. Therefore a move to another area will cause difficulties for him, and may well impede his treatment.
4. In a letter dated 17 June 2024, the Defendant asked the Claimant to provide more information for their medical advisers, within 10 working days.
5. Before the expiry of the 10 working day period (1 July 2024), the Claimant was informed, on 28 June 2024, that he was due to be transferred to Napier Barracks on 2 July 2024. Later on 28 June 2024, the Claimant’s solicitors sent a detailed pre-action letter, with further information, asking for a reply on 1 July 2024. However, the Defendant has not replied.
6. In my view, the Claimant has identified a serious issue to be tried, as the Defendant has arguably denied the Claimant the promised time to produce evidence and make representations; failed to give reasons for the removal on 2 July 2024; and failed to address the Claimant’s personal circumstances, in particular the need for him to remain in Southampton. I consider that the balance of convenience lies in favour of permitting him to remain in Southampton until the application for interim relief can be determined.
7. I have granted an anonymity order. The Claimant is an asylum seeker who claims to be at risk. In the circumstances, a departure from the general principle of open justice is justified.