AWT -v- The London Borough of Southwark (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtCivilHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2024-LON-004047

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

4 February 2025

Before:

Matthew Butt KC,
sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court

Between:

The King
on the application of
AWT

-v-

The London Borough of Southwark

Order

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Acknowledgement(s) of Service filed by the Defendant

ORDER by Matthew Butt KC sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court

  1. The Claimant does have permission to file amended grounds.
  2. The Claimant will be known as AWT in this claim.
  3. In the event, that a non-party makes an application to the Court for permission to access the documents on the court file or a statement of case the parties will be given 7 days’ notice before any such application is considered by the Court
  4. The Claimant does have permission to rely upon the expert report of Dr Jawad Hassan Zadeh dated 5 November 2024.
  5. The Defendant has 14 days upon service of this order to file its AOS and Summary Grounds of Defence.
  6. The matter of permission and interim relief are to be determined by the Court on an expedited basis thereafter.
  7. Costs Reserved.

REASONS

  1. The Claimant (C) challenges a decision of the Defendant (D) to asses his date of birth as 16 February 2001 making him five years older than his claimed date of birth of 16 February 2006.
  2. This order replaces the draft consent order dated 21 January 2025 as events have moved on since the draft order was signed by the parties and as there is a dispute as to one of its paragraphs. The draft order required the approval of a judge as it included orders relating to expert evidence and anonymity.
  3. I grant the Claimant permission to file amended grounds and to rely on expert evidence. These are not opposed by the Defendant.
  4. I grant anonymity as C is an asylum seeker from Afghanistan and anonymity is necessary to protect his Article 8 rights. I also grant permission to rely on the expert evidence served.
  5. There is a dispute between the parties as to when the Defendant should acknowledge service. The Defendant’s position is that it has 21 days from when the consent order was signed and sealed by the court. The draft consent order, however, provides that (1) permission to file amended grounds is granted….(3) the Defendant has 21 days upon receipt of amended grounds to file its AOS and defence. I understand that amended grounds were served on 23 December 2024. I anticipate the Defendant will argue that there were no amended grounds until the draft consent order was approved by the court. I do not consider it would be in the interests of justice to litigate this issue. This should have been agreed between the parties when the consent order was drafted. A dispute of this kind could have been foreseen.
  6. I therefore extend time (if this is necessary) for the Defendant to acknowledge service and to serve summary grounds of defence. These must be served within 14 days of the date of this order. This time is abridged due to the fact that the Defendant has been aware of the nature of this claim for a considerable period of time. The issues in the case are not complicated.
  7. The case is to be referred to a judge to determine permission and interim relief on an expedited basis thereafter.

Signed: Matthew Butt KC