CHE -v- Hampshire County Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2025-LON-002737

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

1 September 2025

Before:

The Honourable Mr Justice Linden

Between:

The King
on the application of
CHE
(by her litigation friend, CED)

-v-

Hampshire County Council

Order

On an application by the Claimant for expedition

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Linden

  1. By 4.30pm on Monday 8 September 2025:
    a) The Defendant will file and serve its Acknowledgement of Service and Summary Grounds of Defence.
    b) The Defendant will make any submissions which it considers appropriate as to the whether the Claimant should be represented by a litigation friend and, if so, whether it should be her father; as to expedition and as to whether an anonymity order is appropriate.
    c) The parties will seek to agree directions as to consideration of permission and the timetable to trial in the event that permission is granted, and will file and serve their proposed timetable(s). Where there is disagreement, the parties will indicate and explain their respective positions.
  2. The papers will be placed before a judge in the week commencing 8 September 2025 (if possible) for consideration of directions and, if appropriate, permission.
  3. Pending further order, upon it appearing that non-disclosure of the identity of the Claimant is necessary in order to protect her interests, pursuant to rule 39.2(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and rules 5.4C of the Civil Procedure Rules:
    a) The Claimant shall be referred to in these proceedings as CHE and her litigation friend as CED (“the ciphers”).
    b) The Claimant’s name and that of her litigation friend are to be withheld from the public and must not to be disclosed in any proceedings in open court.
    c) There is to be substituted for all purposes in these proceedings in place of references to the Claimant and her litigation friend by name, and whether orally or in writing, references to the cipher.
    d) Pursuant to s.11 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.
    e) Pursuant to CPR 5.4C(4):

    i) The parties must, when filing any statement of case, also file
    a redacted copy of that statement of case omitting the name, address and any other information which could lead to the identification of the Claimant.
    ii) Unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4(C)(6), no non-party may obtain an unredacted copy of any statement of case.

    f) Any person wishing to apply to vary or discharge this Order must make an Application to the Court, served on each party.
  4. Liberty to apply.

Reasons

  1. I note that the decision under challenge is a care and support plan dated 2 July 2025 (see section 3.1 of the Claim Form). There also appears from the Statement of Facts and Grounds to be a complaint about failure to secure support required by and Education, Health and Care Plan (“EHCP”) dated 26 July 2024. There have also been various threats of litigation in 2024/2025. Yet no application was made to the court until mid August 2025.
  2. In addition, it appears from the correspondence that, whether or not the criticisms of the terms of the care and support plan as being vague are sound, the Defendant is taking steps to secure support for the Claimant pursuant to that plan.
  3. Accordingly, whilst I appreciate that the Claimant’s needs appear to be pressing I think that the court should hear from the Defendant before deciding whether the degree of expedition contended for by the Claimant is warranted.

Signed:

Mr Justice Linden
1 September 2025