FG -v- The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2023-LON-003792

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

29 April 2024

Before:

The Honourable Mr Justice Murray

Between:

The King on the application of
FG

-v-

The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

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 Acknowledgement of Service (“AoS”) filed by the Defendant

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Murray

  1. Pursuant to CPR r. 39.2(4), there shall not be disclosed in any report of the proceedings the name of the Claimant or any details leading to her identification and the Claimant, if referred to, shall only be referred
    to as “FG”.
  2. Pursuant to s.11 Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant, or of any details leading to her identification in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.
  3. Pursuant to CPR r. 5.4C, a person who is not party to the proceedings may obtain a copy of a statement of case, judgment or order from the court records only if the statement of case, judgment or order has been
    anonymised such that: (a) the Claimant is referred to in those documents only as ‘”FG”; and (b) any reference to the name of the Claimant is deleted from these documents.
  4. The Defendant is granted an extension of time for filing and serving its AoS.
  5. The application for permission to apply for judicial review is refused.
  6. No order for costs.

Reasons

  1. This matter is related to AC-2023-LON-001606. On 9 April 2024 I handed down judgment in that case ([2024] EWHC 780 (Admin)) in which I set out my reasons for refusing FG’s claim for judicial review
    against the Defendant (“the Equality Act Judgment”). FG had alleged in that claim that the Defendant had discriminated against her and continued to do so by failing to take reasonable steps to address excessive noise and foul smells in the flat provided to her by the Defendant under Part 6 of the Housing Act. FG’s claims in that case were based on the Equality Act 2010. That claim originally included two grounds arising under the Care Act in relation to an earlier assessment under the Care Act 2014, but for reasons set out at [3] of the Equality Act Judgment, those grounds were not pursued, and this claim was instead issued.
  2. For reasons set out at [2] of the Equality Act Judgment, I made an anonymity order in relation to FG in respect of that claim. Given the link between the claims and, for the same reasons, I consider it necessary
    to secure the proper administration of justice and to protect the interests of FG to make an anonymity order also in relation to these proceedings.
  3. The Defendant’s deadline for filing its AoS was 12 January 2024. On that day, it filed its Summary of Grounds for Contesting the Claim (“SGCC”) but due to an oversight did not file the AoS. Although the AoS was filed a few days late, FG has not indicated that she was prejudiced by the late filing of the AoS. She had the benefit from 12 January 2024 of effective confirmation by the Defendant that it had been served, that it was contesting the claim, and a summary of the grounds on which it would do so. In the circumstances, there has been no material prejudice to FG, and it is in the interests of justice to grant the extension of time sought.
  4. My reasons for refusing permission are that I do not consider any of the grounds put forward by FG to be arguable, for the reasons set out in the SGCC, with which I agree.
  5. I have made no order for costs. Although in the SGCC the Defendant has sought an order that FG pay its costs (subject to the usual public funding limitation), the Defendant has not filed a costs schedule, which
    I need in order summarily to assess the costs. See paragraph 25.4 of The Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2023.