CHR -v- London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2025-LON-003074

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

12 September 2025

Before:

The Honourable Mr Justice Sheldon

Between:

The King
on the application of
CHR
(a minor, acting by his litigation friend, CHH)

-v-

London Borough of Richmond upon Thames

Order

On an application by the Claimant for interim relief

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Sheldon

  1. Anonymity:

(a) Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 the Claimant’s and the Litigation Friend’s names are to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and the Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as “CHR” and the Litigation Friend as “CHH” respectively.

(b) Pursuant to s. 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant or of the Litigation Friend or of any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant or the Litigation Friend 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 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 or of the Litigation Friend; if any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant or of the Litigation Friend, a redacted copy omitting that information must be filed at the same time and must then be served with the unredacted version;

(ii) 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 part of the Order must make an application, served on each party.

    2. Interim Relief: The application for interim relief is refused.

    3. If the Claimant wishes to renew the application for interim relief at an oral hearing, he should apply to have this Order set aside by making an application within 7 days of the date of this Order.

    Reasons

    1. The Claimant is a child in Year 6 of his schooling. As such, he and his Litigation Friend (his father) require anonymity in these proceedings. This outweighs any public interest in their identity. So as to maintain that anonymity, standard directions have been provided.
    2. As for the claim for interim relief – that the local authority within whose area the Claimant lives should carry out an Education, Health and Care Plan assessment – this raises no serious issue to be tried. Whatever the merits of the underlying claim, there is a bespoke statutory scheme for examining the decision made by the Defendant: the Claimant can appeal to the First-tier Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Tribunal. Reference to this route was specifically referred to by the Defendant in the decision letter (which is the subject of challenge) of 23 July 2025: see pages 60-2 of the Bundle).
    3. Given that there is a bespoke statutory scheme for such matters, the Administrative Court will not entertain a challenge to the Defendant’s refusal to carry out the assessment. Accordingly, there is no basis for interim relief.

    Signed: Mr Justice Sheldon
    12 September 2025