AOX -v- Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and another (anonymity order)

Admiralty CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-CDF-000077

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

28 November 2025

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice O’Farrell

Between:

The King on the application of
AOX

-v-

Secretary of State for Health and Social Care

NHS England

and

Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall Police

Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust
(Interested parties)

Order

Notification of the Judge’s decision on the application for permission to apply for judicial review (CPR 54.11, 54.12)

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant, the Acknowledgements of service filed by the Defendants and the Reply by the Claimant

ORDER by the Honourable Mrs Justice O’Farrell

  1. The Claimant’s application for anonymity is granted as follows.
    a) Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998:
    i) the Claimant’s name is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and
    ii) the Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as “AOX”.
    b) Pursuant to s. 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.
    c) Pursuant to CPR 5.4C(4):
    i) the parties must within 7 days 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;
    ii) 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;
    iii) unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party may obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.
    d) The Court’s CE-file system shall be clearly marked with the words “An anonymity order was made in this case on 28 November 2025 and any application by a non-party to inspect or obtain a copy document from this file must be dealt with in accordance with the terms of that order.”
    e) Any person wishing to vary or discharge this Order must make an application, served on each party.
    f) Pursuant to CPR 39.2(5) and the Practice Guidance: Publication of Privacy and Anonymity Orders dated 16 April 2019 a copy of this order shall be published on the Judicial Website of the High Court of Justice (www.judiciary.uk). For that purpose, a court officer will send a copy of the order by email to the Judicial Office at judicialwebupdates@judiciary.uk.
  2. The application for permission to apply for judicial review is adjourned to be listed in court as a “rolled-up hearing”, on notice to the Defendants and the Interested Parties, as soon as possible after 2 February 2026. If permission to apply for judicial review is granted at that hearing, the Court will proceed immediately to determine the substantive claim.
  3. The application is to be listed for 2 days; the parties to provide a written estimate within 7 days of service of this order if they disagree with that estimate.

Observations

  1. The Claimant seeks permission to challenge the failure of the First and/or Second Defendant to establish an Article 3 ECHR compliant inquiry into the circumstances surrounding abuse perpetrated by Mr. Iuliu Stan (formerly Dr. Iuliu Stan), as an employee of the Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust regarding his administration of per-rectum medication to young men and boys.
  2. The Claimant is a vulnerable young man and this case concerns sensitive details of his mental health, treatment and abuse by Mr Stan. The case can be fully reported without him being named. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice made in paragraph 1 of the order.
  3. In November 2020, the Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust (“the Trust”) conducted a “Maintaining High Professional Standards in the NHS” (“MPS”) investigation, which concluded that Mr. Stan had administered per-rectum medication on over 200 occasions between 2017 and 2020, 3 of the patients concerned were children, most of the patients were male and that Mr. Stan had failed to follow the Trust’s chaperone policy, despite express instructions that he should do so.
  4. Subsequently, Mr Stan was dismissed by the Trust and, following a reference to the GMC, Mr Stan was struck off the medical register.
  5. In 2024, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (“MPTS”) considered allegations in respect of Mr Stan’s treatment of 36 patients and made findings of misconduct, primarily the administering of per rectum medication to men and boys for which there was an absence of clinical justification and which Mr Stan perpetrated for his own sexual gratification.
  6. On 24 April 2024, the Claimant issued this application for judicial review, seeking a declaration that the First and Second Defendants are in ongoing breach of their investigative duty arising pursuant to Article 3 and in respect of the actions of Mr Stan; and/or a mandatory order directing an Article 3 compliant investigation.
  7. There are also ongoing civil claims by various claimants, seeking compensation and also an ongoing criminal investigation.
  8. The key issues are: (i) whether the conduct of Mr Stan is of a severity to engage Article 3 of the ECHR; (ii) if the Article 3 investigative duty was engaged, whether it has been met by the combination of internal and external investigations; (iii) whether no relief would be given in these proceedings having regard to the availability of alternative civil and criminal proceedings; (iv) whether the JR proceedings are too late or premature; and (v) whether the proceedings have been brought against the correct defendants.
  9. The issues raised are not straightforward and the Court is not prepared to grant or refuse permission for JR without full submissions at an oral hearing. This matter is clearly of importance to all affected by Mr Stan’s conduct and future patients of the Trust. The most efficient way of dealing with this matter is by way of a rolled up hearing, so that all issues can be considered and determined in the round.

Case Management Directions

  1. The Claimant must, within 7 days of the date of service of this Order, file an undertaking to pay the continuation fee (see below) if permission to apply for Judicial Review is granted.
  2. The Defendants and any other person served with the Claim Form who wishes to contest the claim or support it on additional grounds shall, by 4pm on 15 December 2025, file and serve (a) Detailed Grounds for contesting the claim or supporting it on additional grounds, and (b) any written evidence that is to be relied on. For the avoidance of doubt, a party who has filed and served Summary Grounds pursuant to CPR 54.8 may comply with (a) above by filing and serving a document which states that those Summary Grounds shall stand as the Detailed Grounds required by CPR 54.14.
  3. Any application by the Claimant to serve evidence in reply shall be filed and served by 4pm on 12 January 2026.
  4. The parties shall agree the contents of the hearing bundle and must file it with the Court not less than 2 weeks before the date of the hearing of the judicial review. An electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared and lodged in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The parties shall, if requested by the Court lodge 2 hard-copy versions of the hearing bundle.
  5. The Claimant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 10 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
  6. The Defendants and Interested Parties must file and serve their Skeleton Arguments not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
  7. The parties shall agree the contents of a bundle containing the authorities to be referred to at the hearing. An electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The parties shall if requested by the Court, prepare a hard-copy version of the authorities bundle. The electronic version of the bundle and if requested, the hard copy version of the bundle, shall be lodged with the Court not less than 3 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
  8. CPR 2.11 shall not apply to these proceedings.