EFG -v- University of Durham (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2024-LON-003111

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

20 February 2025

Before:

His Honour Judge Jarman KC

Between:

The King on the application of
EFG

-v-

University of Durham

Order

Notification of Judge’s Decision (CPR 54.11, 54.12)

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

ORDER BY HIS HONOUR JUDGE JARMAN KC Sitting as a judge of the High Court

  1. Permission to apply for judicial review: Permission is granted on all grounds.
  2. Pursuant to CPR r.39.2, the identity of the Claimant shall not be directly or indirectly disclosed, and these proceedings shall be known as R (EFG) v University of Durham.
  3. The claim is stayed for 3 months to allow the parties to enter into alternative dispute resolution. The parties may apply to extend the stay if necessary.
  4. By the end of that period or any extension the parties shall notify the court of the up-to-date position. If the claim has not settled the parties shall together with such notification file draft directions which shall be agreed as far as practicable.

Observations and reasons

(1) The statement of grounds contain very detailed factual matters. The Defendant does not engage with all of the detail of these, other than denials, because it submits that the Claimant has an alternative remedy which is to make a complaint to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education.
(2) However, as well as issues regarding whether that is the appropriate route to consider EHCR rights and the timescales involved, it is questionable whether that route is appropriate given the very detailed factual matters relied upon. Such reliance also raises an issue as to how easily these can be dealt with at a judicial review hearing.
(3) The parties are strongly encouraged to engage in alternative dispute resolution which may well bring about a speedier resolution of the core concerns of the parties. It appears that the Defendant is or has been willing to consider this course.
(4) The anonymity order is necessary to secure the administration of justice and for the protection of the Claimant