AKE -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionOrder

Claim Number: AC-2024-LON-002932

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

3 September 2024

Before:
The Honourable Mr Justice Ritchie

Between:

AKE

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Order

BEFORE the Honourable Mr Justice Ritchie sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, the Strand, London on 3.9.2024 as the immediate Judge.

UPON an application by the Claimant for urgent consideration dated 30.8.2024.

AND UPON consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant.

UPON CONSIDERING an application for anonymity by the Claimant dated 30.8.2024 and the bundles filed herein.

AND UPON the Court noting that the Claimant may from time to time be or become a protected party but is not currently one.

AND UPON:
(a) consideration of the Claimant’s Article 8 right to respect for private and family life and the Article 10 right to freedom of expression;
(b) the Defendant making no representations.
(c) the press making no representations to the contrary.

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.

NOW IT IS ORDERED THAT:

  1. The application for urgent consideration is refused.

    Anonymity
  2. The application for anonymity is granted. The identity of the Claimant shall not be disclosed.
  3. 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 or of any member of the Claimant’s immediate family is prohibited. Documents filed in future
  4. That the name 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 “AKE”.
  5. 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.

    Court files
  6. 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.
  7. 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”.
  8. 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 or deputy and the Court will effect service.
  9. The Court’s paper and digital files are to be marked “subject to an Anonymity Order”.

    Exceptions
  10. The provisions of this Order shall not apply:-
    a. to communications between the Court Funds Office and the anonymised party in relation to the payment of money into the Court Funds Office for the benefit of the anonymised party or the investment or treatment of payment out of such money;
    b. to communications between the Court Funds Office and/or the anonymised party and any financial institution concerned as to the receipt or investment of such money; or
    c. to records kept by the Court Funds Office or the anonymised party or any such financial institution in relation to such money.

    Procedure
  11. In so far as the Order is made under rule 23.9 without service of a copy of the application notice on the Defendant, the Claimant shall comply with rule 23.9(2) by service on the Defendant.
  12. Any non-party affected by this Order may apply on notice to all parties to have this Order
    set aside or varied.

REASONS

  1. The application is not so urgent or so compelling that an order should be made effectively granting the substantive relief claimed in the proceedings, albeit on an interim basis, before the Defendant has been given the usual opportunity, by filing of an Acknowledgment of Service, to respond to it.
  2. There does also appear to have been considerable delay in making the application and the Defendant is not responsible for this and should not be prejudiced by it.
  3. Anonymity is granted for the reasons set out in the application, the Claimant has mental health challenges and is at risk or oppression if he is to be deported to Iran.

    Factual background
  4. The Claimant (C) came to the UK from Iran on 2012. He claimed asylum but this was refused.
  5. He has suffered from complex mental health challenges including bi-polar disorder. His solicitors assert he currently has capacity. The medical evidence in the bundle is 4 years out of date.
  6. During his time in the UK he has been convicted of many crimes. The previous convictions summary shows convictions for drug offence; sexual assault offences; theft; public order offences violence against the police; racially aggravated harassment; possession of bladed weapons and firearms offences. His last conviction in January 2024 was for 9 months in prison for possessing a bladed weapon (para. 5 of the Claimant’s SFG). This date must be wrong because the Claimant asserts that he was due to be released on 15.1.2024.
  7. C has an outstanding “further leave to remain” application dated 4.7.2022 which has not been decided. On 30.1.2024 the Defendant decided to deport C on grounds that his presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good, but recognises in correspondence and in detention reviews that this will not occur soon. He is detained pending the making of a deportation order. He is assessed as posing a high risk of harm to the public and a medium risk of absconding. On 24.4.2024 the Defendant considered that C could be released pending finding appropriate accommodation and this has not been easy to provide considering his mental health and the risk factors he poses.
  8. C asserts that:
    (1) there was no power to detain him after his criminal sentence expired;
    (2) the detention has been unlawful from 16.21.2024;
    (3) the Defendant has failed to apply its own “Adults at Risk in Immigration Detention” policy;
    (4) the deportation decision was unlawful;
    (5) C has leave to remain pending determination of his application dated 4.7.2022.
  9. If C’s submissions are correct then the unlawfulness arose on 16.1.2024. The urgent application was made on 30.8.2024. That delay does not justify this application being listing in the immediate list.

DATED: 3 September 2024