Claim number: AC-2023-LON-003348
In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
13 November 2023
The Honourable Mr Justice Poole
The King on the application of
Secretary of State for Defence
Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs
(1) To (6) Z1 to Z6 (Interested parties)
On an urgent application by the Claimant for the proceedings to be expedited
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant, without a hearing
UPON considering the documents lodged by the Claimant, including an application for expedition and applications for anonymity:
ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Poole on 13 November 2023
- The Claimant shall be anonymised in these proceedings, and referred to as ‘AMZ’
- The Interested Parties shall be anonymised in these proceedings, and referred as to ‘Z1’- ‘Z6.’
- The Claimant’s application to expedite the Defendant’s Acknowledgement of Service and determination of permission on the papers is refused.
- Costs reserved.
- Anonymity is granted given the claimed vulnerability of the interested parties.
- The Claimant’s application under the Afghan Resettlement and Assistance Policy was made on 30 August 2021, with further applications dated 4 April and 12 July 2022. The decision that he was ineligible was communicated to the Claimant on 11 August 2023 and a review sought on 29 August 2023. Pre-action correspondence was dated 31 August 2023 with a response from the Defendant dated 19 September 2023.
- The Claimant is in England and has been since August 2021. The interested parties are in Afghanistan (Mother and siblings) and Iran (Father, subject to leave to remain which is said to have expired on 12 November 2023).
- Accepting, on the evidence provided, that the interested parties are in a precarious position due to their links with the Claimant, there are nevertheless no grounds to expedite the application herein which is a challenge to the refusal dated 28 September 2023 to expedite the review of the decision of 11 August 2023. Given the history of the case as outlined above, there is no requirement for this claim to be expedited so that it is heard sooner than other applications for judicial review made at the same time. The usual timescales for the Defendant to file and serve the AoS and for the court’s decision on permission on the papers are appropriate to the circumstances. The precarious position of the interested parties has not changed for a number of months and is not such to justify a departure from the usual timetable.
- CPR r54.8 applies in relation to the AoS and the papers will be considered by a Judge to determine permission in the usual way.