R (AM) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case Number: CO/3910/2022

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

25 October 2022

The Honourable Mrs Justice Yip

In the matter of an application for judicial review

The King
on the application of
Secretary of State for the Home Department

On an application by the Claimant for urgent interim relief
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Honourable Mrs Justice Yip

  1. The Claimant’s application for an anonymity order is granted. The Claimant shall have anonymity until further order. The Claimant shall be referred to only as AM. Anyone who is not a party to the proceedings may obtain a copy of any statement of case or other document filed, judgment, order or court record only if anonymised.
  2. The claimant’s application for interim relief shall be listed for hearing on 1 November 2022 with a time estimate of 1 hour.


  1. The Claimant applied for asylum support under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in November 2021. Despite following this up, the application has apparently still not been determined. The Claimant is aged 82. She states that she has serious medical conditions which are being exacerbated by the lack of support.
  2. Given the Claimant’s vulnerability, I consider that her application for interim relief requires urgent consideration. The court would be assisted by knowing the Defendant’s stance. It appears that there has been no response to pre-action correspondence. I consider the best way to deal with this urgent application is to list for a hearing next week when representations can be made. The Defendant is already on notice that a claim for judicial review was to be made with interim relief being sought and I would hope will respond prior to the hearing.
  3. The claim relies upon the Claimant’s current destitution, her medical conditions and disability. It also alludes to past traumatic experiences and the impact on her mental health. At this stage, I consider it necessary to make an anonymity order to protect her privacy. That may be reconsidered in due course.