CSS -v- Haberdashers’ Aske’s Foundation Trust (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-LON-002946

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

15 September 2025

Before:

Andrew Kinnier KC
(Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court)

Between:

The King
on the application of
CSS
(Claimant, by his mother and Litigation Friend, CTR)

-v-

Haberdashers’ Aske’s Foundation Trust
(Defendant)

and

The London Borough of Lewisham
(Interested Party)

Order

On an application by the Claimant for expedition and other interim measures

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Defendant

ORDER BY ANDREW KINNIER K.C.
(Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court)

  1. Litigation Friend: the Claimant’s mother is appointed his Litigation Friend for the purposes of this claim.

2. 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 Claimant and Litigation Friend’s names are to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and

(ii) the Claimant and the Litigation Friend are to be referred to orally and in writing as CSS and CTR respectively.

(b) Pursuant to s. 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant and Litigation Friend or of any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant and 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 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 and the Litigation Friend;

(ii) if any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant and the Litigation Friend, 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.

  1. Abridgement of time and expedition:

(a) The Defendant’s Acknowledgement of Service (CPR 54.8) must be filed and served by 4pm on 30 September 2025.

(b) Any Reply from the Claimant (CPR 54.8A) must be filed and served by 4pm on 7 October 2025.

(c) The papers are to be referred to a judge or deputy judge immediately thereafter to decide whether to grant an extension of time and permission.

  1. The parties have permission to vary or set aside this order on giving 2 working days’ notice to the other side.

5. Costs reserved.

REASONS

(1) Litigation Friend: having considered the certificate of suitability (dated 1 September 2025), I am satisfied that it is appropriate to appoint the Claimant’s mother as his Litigation Friend for the purposes of this claim.

(2) Anonymity: the Claimant is a 15 year-old boy and so it is necessary and appropriate to anonymise him and, to preserve his anonymity, also his mother’s identity. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 2.

(3) Abridgement of time/expedition: the claim concerns the permanent exclusion of the Claimant from the school that he has attended since September 2021. Given the claim’s subject-matter and the time that has elapsed since the claim was issued so allowing the Defendant to prepare its response, it is appropriate to order a degree of expedition in this case so that the question of permission (including whether an extension of time is necessary/appropriate) is decided as soon as possible. In making this direction, I have considered the Defendant’s submissions set out in its solicitors’ letter of 5 September 2025, but I am particularly mindful of the statement of principle that cases that involve issues about the education of a child are par excellence cases that need to be heard and determined expeditiously: H v East Sussex County Council [2009] EWCA Civ 249, paras. 13 and 14.

Signed: Andrew Kinnier K.C.

Date: 15 September 2025