AYR -v- Birmingham City Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

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

27 February 2025

Before:

Her Honour Judge Carmel Wall, sitting as a Judge of the High Court

Between:

The King on the application of
AYR

-v-

Birmingham City Council

Order

On an application by the Claimant for anonymity, urgent consideration and interim relief

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant.

ORDER BY HER HONOUR JUDGE CARMEL WALL SITTING AS A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT

1. Anonymity:
a) Pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) and/or the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and/or 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 AYR.
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 a redacted copy of any statement of case 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;
iii) unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party many obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.
d) Any person wishing to vary or discharge this Order must make an application, served on each party.

    2. Abridgement of time and urgency:
    a) The Defendant’s Acknowledgement of Service (CPR 54.8) and response to the application for interim relief must be filed and served by 4pm on 14 March 2025.
    b) Any Reply from the Claimant (CPR 54.8A) must be filed and served by 4pm on 21 March 2025.
    c) The papers are to be referred to a judge or deputy judge within 7 days thereafter.

    3. Application for interim relief:
    a) The application for interim relief is to be further considered after the Defendant has filed and served its response to the application (pursuant to directions set out above) and at the same time as consideration of permission to apply for judicial review in accordance with the abridged timetable.

    4. Costs: Reserved.

    Reasons

    1. Anonymity: The claim relies on sensitive personal information about the Claimant and her two minor children including some personal medical information. The Claimant has a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to these matters and there is no sufficiently strong countervailing public interest in disclosure of her identity. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1.

    2. Abridgement of time: The Claimant’s case is that she and her family have been living in patently unsuitable and overcrowded conditions in interim accommodation since February 2024. She argues that the Defendant accepted a main housing duty towards her on 15 May 2024 and that the Defendant has delayed unreasonably and without sufficient explanation in providing her family with suitable accommodation. The Claimant’s household includes two minor children. On the Claimant’s case the ongoing delay is having an adverse effect on their health and wellbeing such as to justify urgent consideration and abridgement of time to consider permission.

    3. Application for interim relief: I recognise that the Claimant’s living conditions, as described, are extremely difficult and have been for a year. However, there is no sufficiently acute issue identified in the application that justifies consideration of interim relief without giving the Defendant an opportunity to respond to the application. I note that although the correspondence from the Defendant seeking repeated extensions of time to provide alternative accommodation for the Claimant has appeared to be in a standard form and lacked detail, the most recent letter referred specifically to work being undertaken to renew the kitchen and bathroom facilities in the proposed alternative property. The Defendant must be given an opportunity to respond to the application and explain (if so advised) what, if any, obstacles to compliance with its statutory duty remain.