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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-LON-001446

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

25 February 2026

BEFORE:

THE HON. MS JUSTICE OBI

BETWEEN:

THE KING on the application of
BRG

-v-

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

and

BRH and BOH
(Interested Parties)

Order

Notification of Judge’s Decision (CPR 54.11, 54.12)

Following consideration of the documents filed by the Claimant, the Defendant’s Response and the Claimant’s Reply

ORDER BY THE HON. MS JUSTICE OBI

  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 name of the claimant is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and
    (ii) the claimant and the interested parties are to be referred to orally and in writing as BRG, BRH and BOH.
    (b) Pursuant to s. 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the second, third or fourth claimants or of any matter likely to lead to the identification of any of them 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. Permission to Amend:
    (a) The Claimant’s application to amend the grounds for judicial review, filed on 13 June 2025, is granted.
  3. Permission to apply for judicial review:
    (b) Permission is granted on all amended grounds.
  4. Case Management Directions:
    (a) The Defendant must, within 35 days of the date of service of this Order, file and serve (i) Detailed Grounds for contesting the claim or supporting it on additional grounds and (ii) any written evidence to be relied on.
    (b) The Defendant may comply with sub-paragraph (a)(i) above by filing and serving a document which states that its Summary Grounds are to stand as the Detailed Grounds required by CPR 54.14.
    (c) Any application by the Claimant to serve evidence in reply must be filed and served, together with a copy of that evidence, within 21 days of the date on which the Defendant serves evidence pursuant to (a) above.
    (d) The parties must agree the contents of the hearing bundle. An electronic version of the bundle must be prepared and lodged, in accordance with the Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide Chapter 21 and the Guidance on the Administrative Court website, not less than 28 days before the date of the substantive hearing. The parties must, if requested by the Court, lodge 2 hard copy versions of the hearing bundle.
    (e) The Claimant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument (maximum 25 pages), complying with CPR 54 PD para. 15 and the Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide paras 20.1 to 20.3, not less than 21 days before the date of the substantive hearing.
    (f) The Defendant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument (maximum 25 pages), complying with CPR 54 PD para. 15 and the Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide paras 20.1 to 20.3, not less than 14 days before the date of the substantive hearing.
    (g) The parties must agree the contents of a bundle containing the authorities to be referred to at the hearing. An electronic version of the bundle must be prepared in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The parties must, if requested by the Court, prepare a hard-copy version of the authorities bundle. The electronic version of the bundle and if requested, the hard copy version of the bundle, must be lodged with the Court not less than 7 days before the date of the substantive hearing.
    (h) The time estimate for the substantive hearing is 1 day. If either party considers that this time estimate should be varied, they must inform the court as soon as possible.

OBSERVATIONS AND REASONS

  1. The Claimant and Interested Parties are all victims of domestic abuse, confirmed by the perpetrator’s conviction and restraining order. There is a real risk of harm if identified, given the perpetrator’s past use of immigration processes as a means of control. The Defendant does not oppose anonymity. Anonymity is necessary and proportionate.
  2. The amendments clarify the issues by abandoning former Ground 1 and refining the discrimination ground to include “other status” (immigration status). They reflect the Claimant’s evidence and align with Home Office guidance recognising abuse involving control of immigration status. The Defendant suffers no prejudice, having already addressed the amended grounds.
  3. The discrimination ground is arguable, relying on Hode & Abdi and the Claimant’s near-identical position to partners on the family route once her husband became settled. The challenges to the Defendant’s exercise of discretion and LOTR assessment raise arguable issues, particularly given policy requiring consideration where abuse affected immigration status. The Claimant’s arguments that material considerations (coercive control, expectation of settlement, husband’s professional role) were overlooked are also arguable. Administrative Review is not an adequate alternative remedy on these facts, as it cannot address discrimination or discretionary failures.