AZ -v- London Borough of Redbridge (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2024-LON-003897

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

12 December 2024

Before:

Judge Melanie Plimmer

Between:

The King on the application of
AZ

-v-

London Borough of Redbridge

Order

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by Judge Melanie Plimmer sitting as a Judge of the High Court

1. The Claimant’s application for permission to apply for Judicial Review and interim relief shall be passed to a Judge to consider within 21 days following receipt of the Defendant’s acknowledgment of service or the expiry of the relevant timescale, whichever occurs earlier.

2. Anonymity:
(a) The identity of the Claimant as a party to these proceedings is confidential and shall not be published.
(b) Pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) there shall not be disclosed in any report of these proceedings or other publication the name or address of the claimant or of any details that could lead to the identification of the claimant as a party to these proceedings.
(c) In any judgment or report of these proceedings or any other publication in relation thereto, the claimant shall be referred to as ‘AZ’ and any details that might lead to the identification of the claimant shall be redacted before publication.

Reasons

1. For the reasons identified in the Claimant’s statement of facts and grounds and associated applications, in particular the nature and extent of the Claimant’s vulnerability and circumstances, a moderate degree of expedition is warranted.

2. Until the claim is considered in more detail, I am satisfied that an anonymity order is justified. The claimant’s right to privacy in the light of his vulnerability, the intimacy of care he is said to require, the extent of suffering alleged in his claim and the fact that he has an outstanding fresh claim for asylum, tend to support an anonymity order. This matter can be revisited when it is next considered on the papers or at any future hearing.

3. It is important that the Court is provided with the benefit of submissions on the part of the Defendant before making a decision on interim relief.