DR and others -v- London Borough of Southwark (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: CO/880/2023

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

30 June 2023

Before:

The Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

Between:

The King on the application of
(1) DR
(2) CL
(3) N (a child by his litigation friend and father, DR)
(4) C (a child by his litigation friend and father, DR)

-v-

London Borough of Southwark

Order

Notification of the Judge’s decision on the application for permission to apply for judicial review (CPR 54.11, 54.12)
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Acknowledgment of service filed by the Defendant;
Order by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

  1. Pursuant to CPR r.39.2, in any report of these proceedings, there shall be no publication of the name and address of the Claimants and their litigation friend, nor any other particulars likely to lead to their identification. In the proceedings, the Claimants shall be anonymised and referred to as set out above in the title to this order.
  2. Within 14 days of the date of this order, the Claimants shall file with the Court copies of case documents which have been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimants and their litigation friend, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
  3. Non-parties may not obtain any documents from the court file which have not been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimants and their litigation friend, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
  4. The application for permission to apply for judicial review is granted.
  5. The hearing is to be listed for 1½ days; the parties to provide a written time estimate within 7 days of service of this order if they disagree with this direction.
  6. Venue: London.
  7. The Claimants are granted permission to rely upon their Reply.
  8. Costs in the case.

Case Management Directions

  1. The Defendant and any other person served with the Claim Form who wishes to contest the claim or support it on additional grounds shall, within 35 days of the date of service of this Order, 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.
  2. The Claimants may file and serve any Reply and any further evidence within 21 days of the date of service of the Detailed Grounds and/or evidence.
  3. The Claimants must file and serve an agreed hearing bundle, not less than 28 days before the date of the hearing. The electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared and lodged by the Claimants in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The Claimants must also lodge two hard-copy versions of the hearing bundle at the Administrative Court Office, not less than 28 days before the date of the hearing.
  4. The Claimants must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 21 days before the date of the hearing.
  5. The Defendant, and any Interested Party wishing to participate in the proceedings, must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 14 days before the date of the hearing.
  6. The Claimants must file and serve an agreed authorities bundle, not less than 5 days before the date of the hearing. The electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared by the Claimants in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The Claimants must also lodge a hard-copy version of the authorities bundle at the Administrative Court Office, not less than 5 days before the date of the hearing.

Observations

  1. The Claimants have raised arguable grounds which merit consideration at a full hearing. Their Reply is relevant to the issues in the claim.
  2. I have granted an anonymity order. The Third and Fourth Claimants are children. Disclosure of the identities of the First and Second Claimants, who are their parents, is likely to lead to disclosure of the identities of the children. In the circumstances, a departure from the general principle of open justice is justified.