Skip to main content

EK -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity)

|High Court|Anonymity Order

Case No. CO/2076/2020

In the High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division

31 July 2020

Before:
The Honourable Mr Justice Murray
Between:
The Queen on the application of
EK (by his litigation friend Madeline Crowley)
-v-
Secretary of State for the Home Department


UPON hearing counsel for the Claimant, Ms Grace Capel, and counsel for the Defendant, Mr Richard Evans, at a remote hearing (conducted through Skype for Business), which took place on 15 July 2020
AND UPON the handing down of the judgment of Murray J on 31 July 2020
IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. An anonymity order is made under CPR rule 39.2(4) in respect of the Claimant who shall be known as “EK” for the purposes of these proceedings.
2. Permission is granted on all grounds.
3. Interim relief is granted in the following terms:
i. The Claimant is granted bail subject to his having been provided with suitable accommodation by the Defendant. Bail is subject to the following conditions:
a. The Claimant must reside at an address to be provided by the Defendant (see further below).
b. The Claimant must report to a police officer or immigration official as and when notified by the Defendant.
c. The Claimant must contact his offender manager promptly following his release from immigration detention (and, in any event, within 24 hours) with regard to reporting requirements, and he must comply with those reporting requirements, which may be varied by the Defendant from time to time.
d. Following the Claimant’s release on immigration bail, management of the Claimant’s bail is to be carried out by the Defendant.
ii. The Defendant shall continue using best endeavours to source suitable accommodation. The Defendant is to provide a statement to the Court on or before a date falling two weeks after the date of this order confirming that suitable accommodation has been found or, if not, detailing the steps that have been taken during that period to find suitable accommodation and explaining why those steps have not been successful. Further weekly reports will be required by the Court until suitable accommodation is found or further order.
4. Pending the release of the Defendant on immigration bail to suitable accommodation or until further order, this matter is reserved to Murray J in relation to the Defendant’s compliance with paragraph 3(ii) of this order. If necessary at some point, Murray J may direct a further hearing to consider the position and whether a further order is necessary. The hearing of the substantive claim is not reserved to Murray J.
5. Expedition of the hearing of the substantive claim is ordered.
6. The following directions are made in relation to the hearing of the claim:
i. The Defendant must file and serve detailed grounds for contesting the claim and any written evidence within 28 days of service of this order.
ii. Any reply and any application by the Claimant to lodge further evidence must be lodged within 14 days of the service of the detailed grounds for contesting the claim.
iii. The Claimant must file and serve a trial bundle not less than 4 weeks before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
iv. The Claimant must file and serve a skeleton argument not less than 14 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
v. The Defendant must file and serve a skeleton argument not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
vi. The Claimant must file an agreed bundle of authorities, not less than 3 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review. Bundle not to exceed 12 authorities without the permission of the court;
vii. The application is to be listed for 1.5 days.

 

 

Related links

Sign up for alerts

Judgments archive

Judgments published on the judiciary website before 2012 can now be found on The National Archives web archive

Judgment Archive