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

Administrative CourtCivilHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2025-LON-000642

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

3 March 2025

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice Foster

Between:

R
on the application of
BAJ

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Order

UPON consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant including applications for urgent consideration and interim relief

ORDER by the Honourable Mrs Justice Foster

Directions

  1. The requirement for an Acknowledgment of Service be dispensed with.
  2. The Defendant is to file such Statement of Grounds of Defence as it is advised to by 10.00 am on Thursday 6 March 2025.
  3. The application for permission to apply for judicial review and an Interim Order are adjourned and will be listed for hearing in court, on notice to the Defendant as soon as possible after
    10.00 am Tuesday 11 March 2025 time estimate 45 minutes.
  4. The parties are to provide a written estimate by email to the other parties and to the Court within 48 hours of service of this Order if they disagree with the estimate at 3 above.
  5. The Claimant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 2 days before the date of the hearing.
  6. The Defendant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 1 day before the date of the hearing.
  7. The parties are to provide a written estimate within 7 days of service of this Order if they disagree with the estimate at 3 above.

    Anonymity
  8. The application for anonymity is granted, pursuant to section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, CPR rule 5.4D-5.4D and Rule 39.2, with effect from the date of this order and until further order:
  9. There shall be substituted for all purposes in this case, in place of references to the Claimant’s name, reference to “BAJ”.
  10. There shall be no publication of any name, address, picture or other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant in these proceedings. “Publication” means communication to the public or any section of the public. It includes publication in a newspaper or broadcast, or on the internet, by any person.
  11. The Defendant, and any party served with or given notice of the anonymity order, has permission to apply to discharge or vary that order. Any application for that purpose must be made in writing, on notice to all parties.
  12. Any application for permission to inspect or obtain a non- anonymised version of a document must be made on notice to the Claimant and in accordance with CPR r.5.4C(6).
  13. Liberty to apply on 24 hours notice to the Court and to the other side to discharge or to vary the order.

The Hon Mrs Justice Foster

Dated this 3 day of March 2025

REASONS

  1. The Claimant who was born in Senafe, Eritrea on 10 May 1990 is a failed asylum seeker who arrived here in 2007. He has an unhappy series of convictions for serious offences since his arrival (Statement of Facts and Grounds paras 16, 20 and 24). He argues he is eligible for s.4 support because he is destitute and in order to avoid a breach of his human rights. He has been rough sleeping .He is described in the claim as “a high risk of premature death”. Although the Claimant received a positive Reasonable Grounds decision on 5 December 2024 and was offered accommodation through the Salvation Army in Huddersfield on 20 December 2024 it appears that he refused it because it was outside London where his essential TB treatment and other local support is located.
  2. The papers say that he has been advised to stay here for the treatment and also advised to submit a further asylum application. . However, on 2 January 2025 the claimant received a letter from the Immigration Enforcement Competent Authority (IECA) informing him that the Home Office was minded to apply for a Public Order Disqualification (POD) in relation to his referral into the National Referral Mechanism (NRM). He is awaiting a final decision (which would disqualify him from support under the NRM). The HO has acknowledged his homelessness and are conscious of the delay in consideration (noted on 14 February).
  3. I recognise there has already been delay notwithstanding this Claimant’s circumstances, however, the Court should have the input of the Defendant. Given the medical position and the requirement for treatment expedition has been written in to the Order – the Defendant will be expected to keep to this timetable. I should add it is not at once clear why the necessary treatment could not be provided in the location of the offered accommodation, but that can be dealt with at the hearing.