BNT -v- London Borough of Croydon (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-LON-002222

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

7 July 2025

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

Between:

The King on the application of
BNT

-v-

London Borough of Croydon

Order

On the Claimant’s application for an anonymity order, urgent consideration, directions and interim relief;

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and other parties;

Order by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

  1. The Defendant do forthwith provide suitable accommodation and support for the Claimant, under the Children Act 1989, on the basis of his claimed age, pending determination of the application for permission to apply for judicial review or further order.
  2. Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and CPR 39.2(4):
    a. The name of the Claimant is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public.
    b. The Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as “BNT”.
  3. Pursuant to section 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.
  4. Pursuant to CPR 5.4C:
    a. Within 7 days of the date of service of this order, the parties must 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;
    b. 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;
    c. Unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party may obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.
  5. The Defendant’s Acknowledgment of Service and Summary Grounds of Resistance, must be filed and served no more than 21 days after the date of service of the claim form and supporting documents.
  6. Any Reply from the Claimant (CPR 54.8A) must be filed and served no more than 7 days after service of the Defendant’s Summary Grounds of Resistance.
  7. The papers are to be referred to a Judge for a decision whether to grant permission to apply for judicial review within 14 days thereafter.
  8. Liberty to apply to vary or discharge this order on 3 days notice to the other party.
  9. Costs reserved.

THIS IS AN INJUNCTION. BREACH OF PARAGRAPH 1 OF THIS ORDER MAY GIVE RISE TO CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS. EVEN IF AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE TO VARY OR DISCHARGE THIS ORDER, IT MUST BE COMPLIED WITH UNLESS OR UNTIL SUCH AN ORDER IS MADE

Reasons

  1. I have granted an anonymity order. The Claimant is a putative child and an asylum seeker who claims to be at risk. In the circumstances, a departure from the general principle of open justice is justified.
  2. The Claimant is a national of Afghanistan, aged 17. His claimed date of birth is 22 April 2008, as shown on his Afghan National Identity Card, issued on 19 February 2022. He challenges the legality of the Defendant’s refusal to accommodate him under section 20 Children Act 198, pending a lawful assessment of his age, and to place reliance upon a date of birth recorded as 1 January 2005. No age assessment has been carried out. I have considered the points made in the Defendant’s email dated 2 July 2025, but nonetheless I consider, on the information before me now, that the Claimant has raised arguable grounds.
  3. I have granted interim relief because there is a serious issue to be tried and the balance of convenience lies in favour of the grant of interim relief. In my view, it is neither safe nor appropriate for a person of the Claimant’s claimed age to be in adult asylum seekers’ accommodation and without any local authority support. Although the Claimant has been temporarily accommodated in shared accommodation with his brother, the evidence before me is that he has been asked to leave because there is insufficient space for him, and will not be able to return there.