DBD -v- North Yorkshire Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2025-LDS-000144

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

18 November 2025

Before:

The Hon. Mrs Justice O’Farrell DBE

Between:

The King
on the application of
DBD
(by his Mother and Litigation Friend, DNM)

-v-

North Yorkshire Council

Order

On an application by the Claimant for urgent consideration, anonymity, JR permission and expedition

Following consideration of:
(1) the JR Claim dated 30 June 2025, the Claimant’s Statement of Facts and Grounds dated 26 June 2025,
(2) the Defendant’s Acknowledgement of Service dated 27 July 2025 and Summary Grounds of Resistance dated 25 July 2025;
(3) the Claimant’s non-compliant Reply dated 31 July 2025 and draft application for permission to rely on additional witness evidence; and
(4) the Claimant’s draft Order

ORDER by the Hon. Mrs Justice O’Farrell DBE:

  1. The Claimant’s application for anonymity is granted as follows.

(a) Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998:

(i) the Claimant’s name is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and

(ii) the Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as “DBD” and his mother and Litigation Friend, who is hereby appointed as such, as “DNM”.

(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 any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant 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;

(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 and must then be served with the unredacted version;

(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) The Court’s CE-file system shall be clearly marked with the words “An anonymity order was made in this case on 18 November 2025 and any application by a non-party to inspect or obtain a copy document from this file must be dealt with in accordance with the terms of that order.”

(e) Any person wishing to vary or discharge this Order must make an application, served on each party.

(f) Pursuant to CPR 39.2(5) and the Practice Guidance: Publication of Privacy and Anonymity Orders dated 16 April 2019 a copy of this order shall be published on the Judicial Website of the High Court of Justice (www.judiciary.uk). For that purpose, a court officer will send a copy of the order by email to the Judicial Office at judicialwebupdates@judiciary.uk.

  1. The case is suitable for expedition, having regard to the age of the Claimant and the adverse impact of any failures (which the Court notes are disputed) in provision of his education.
  2. The application for permission to apply for judicial review is adjourned to be listed in court as a “rolled-up hearing”, on notice to the Defendant, as soon as possible after 12 December 2025. If permission to apply for judicial review is granted at that hearing, the Court will proceed immediately to determine the substantive claim.
  3. The parties are to agree the time estimate for the rolled up hearing; if not agreed, the parties are to submit short, written submissions to the Court by 4pm on 25 November 2025 for determination on the papers.
  4. The Defendant shall, by 4pm on 2 December 2025, file and serve (a) Detailed Grounds for contesting the claim or supporting it on additional grounds, and (b) any written evidence that is to be relied on. For the avoidance of doubt, a party who has filed and served Summary Grounds pursuant to CPR 54.8 may comply with (a) above by filing and serving a document which states that those Summary Grounds shall stand as the Detailed Grounds required by CPR 54.14.
  5. Any application by the Claimant for further interim relief, including permission to rely on its Reply and additional witness evidence must be filed and served by 4pm on 5 December 2025.
  6. The parties shall agree the contents of the hearing bundle and must file it with the Court not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review. An electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared and lodged in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The parties shall, if requested by the Court lodge 2 hard-copy versions of the hearing bundle.
  7. The Claimant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing of the rolled up hearing.
  8. The Defendant and any Interested Party must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 5 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
  9. An agreed, electronic bundle of authorities shall be prepared in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The parties shall 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, shall be lodged with the Court not less than 3 days before the date of the hearing of the rolled up hearing.
  10. The parties shall have liberty to apply to vary or set aside this order on two working days’ notice to the other parties.
  11. Costs reserved.

REASONS

  1. The Claimant is a 10-year-old child with complex special educational needs, including a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder and ADHD. This case concerns sensitive details of his health and education. The case can be fully reported without him being named. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice made in paragraph 1 of the order.
  2. The Claimant’s case is that the special educational provision set out in Section F of the Education and Health Care Plan dated 11 December 2024 is not being delivered by the Defendant so as to meet his needs, contrary to section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014, section 19 of the Education Act 1996 and Article 2 of Protocol 1 to the ECHR. This failure is causing the Claimant distress, regression and deterioration in his emotional and physical wellbeing.
  3. The Defendant denies any breach. The Defendant’s case is that all reasonable and proportionate efforts have been made to secure the educational and therapeutic provisions specified in the Claimant’s EHC plan. It is said that any delays or difficulties in implementing these provisions arose due to circumstances beyond the Defendant’s control, including but not limited to, limited availability of suitable providers availability and the preferences expressed by the Claimant’s parents. While acknowledging that there were specific delays in appointing appropriate therapeutic professionals, the Defendant’s position is that such services have now been arranged and are ready to be delivered in alignment with the requirements of the EHC Plan.
  4. Given the age and vulnerability of the Claimant, it is appropriate that any ongoing dispute between the parties as to provision of necessary services and support should be determined by the Court on an expedited basis.

Signed: Mrs Justice O’Farrell
Dated: 18 November 2025