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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-LON-000191

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

20 January 2025

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

Between:

The King on the application of
ANN

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department


Order

On the Claimant’s application for an anonymity order, urgent consideration, directions and interim relief;

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant;

Order by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

1. Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and CPR 39.2(4):
a. The name of the Claimant is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public.
b. The Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as “ANN”.

2. Pursuant to section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant, or of any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.

3. Pursuant to CPR 5.4C:
a. Within 7 days of the date of service of this order, the parties must 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;
b. If any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant, a redacted copy omitting that information must be filed at the same time and must then be served with the unredacted version;
c. Unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party may obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.

4. The claim is to be expedited.

5. The Defendant must file and serve a response to the application for interim relief, by 10 am on 23 January 2025.

6. Upon the filing of the Defendant’s response, the papers are to be referred to a Judge immediately for a decision whether to grant interim relief.

7. The Claimant is to file and serve copies of the papers in the separate judicial review proceedings in the Upper Tribunal (referred to in the footnote to paragraph 5, page 33 of the bundle), by 12 noon on 21 January 2025.

8. Liberty to apply to vary or discharge this order on 2 days notice to the other party.

9. Costs reserved.

Reasons

1. I have granted an anonymity order because the Claimant is a recognised victim of trafficking and a victim of sexual assault falling within the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992. In the circumstances, a departure from the general principle of open justice is justified.

2. The Claimant challenges the Defendant’s ongoing failure, since 4 December 2024, to provide the Claimant with an ASPEN card or to provide her with adequate financial support payments to meet her essential living needs.

3. The Claimant seeks interim relief in the form of an order requiring the Defendant, within 48 hours, to provide her with a functioning ASPEN card so that she can continue to receive regular weekly financial support, pursuant to section 4(2) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (“IAA 1999”). If this is not technically possible, she seeks an undertaking that regular Emergency Cash Payments (“ECP”) will be made on a two weekly basis until her ASPEN card is restored.

4. The Claimant was granted discretionary leave to remain on 2 February 2024 and received a biometric residence permit (“BRP”) on 9 October 2024. The BRP is unusable because it has been issued in the name of “X” and described her nationality as “unknown”. The Defendant initially terminated the Claimant’s support under section 4 IAA 1999 but after representations, she committed on 3 December 2024 to reinstating and continuing her support until the issue with the BRP was resolved. However, the Claimant has only received one payment of £100 from the Defendant.

5. The Claimant is vulnerable and starving. She has no source of income. Hence the order for expedition and the abridged timetable.

6. The Claimant’s BRP is the subject of separate judicial review proceedings in the Upper Tribunal. The Upper Tribunal should be updated on the changes in the Claimant’s situation, and the Claimant’s advisers should consider a further application for expedition.