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

Administrative CourtCivilHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2022-LON-001655

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

17 March 2025

Before:

Robert Palmer KC
(sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court)

Between:

The King

on the application of

HA

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Order

On an application by the Claimant for leave to withdraw his application for judicial review and for anonymity

Following consideration of the signed Consent Order lodged by the Parties

ORDER BY ROBERT PALMER KC
(sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court)

WITHOUT A HEARING

  1. Anonymity:

(a) Pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) and/or the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and/or 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 HA.

(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), unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party many obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.

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

2. Withdrawal: The Claimant has leave to withdraw his application for judicial review, save in respect of the determination of liability and quantum of damages, if any, arising from his immigration detention. Unless the claim for damages is the subject of settlement within 14 days of the date of this Order, it shall be transferred to the County Court under section 40(2) of the County Courts Act 1984 to proceed as a private law claim for damages. There shall be liberty to apply if 14 days is agreed to be insufficient.

    3. Costs: The Defendant is to pay the Claimant’s reasonable costs of and incidental to this claim for judicial review up to the date on which this Order is sealed, to be the subject of detailed assessment if not agreed.

    4. There shall be a detailed assessment of the Claimant’s legal aid costs.

    REASONS

    (1) The parties filed a draft Consent Order on 7 August 2024 setting out their agreement to the above matters, save in respect of anonymity which had been applied for from the outset of the proceedings. Through an oversight, the draft Consent Order was not sent to a Judge for approval, but the case was closed by the Court Office in any event.

    (2) Given the need for a Judge’s approval of the application for an anonymity order, the matter has been referred to me today.

    (3) Anonymity: The Claimant is an asylum seeker. There is evidence that naming the Claimant will increase the risk they would face if returned to their country of origin. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1.

    (4) Withdrawal: I am content to approve the matters which were agreed by the Parties and set out in the draft Consent Order with one amendment. In particular, it is appropriate to grant leave to withdraw in light of the matters set out in the draft Consent Order, namely:

    a. the Defendant withdrawing the decision of 5 June 2022 to deem the Claimant’s
    asylum application inadmissible;

    b. the Defendant confirming that no future removals of individuals to Rwanda under the Migration and Economic Development Partnership are scheduled or intended to be scheduled;

    c. the Defendant having confirmed that she will make a substantive decision on the merits of the Claimant’s asylum claim, and that the Claimant will be treated as having joined the UK asylum system on the date that the Claimant first claimed asylum;

    d. the Defendant having released the Claimant from immigration detention on or around 27 June 2022; and

    e. the Parties having agreed that the Claimant’s claim for damages arising from his detention by the Defendant be determined before the County Court.

    (5) The amendment to the agreed draft Consent Order arises because the parties agreed a stay of 6 months for the purposes of settlement. Since that settlement window would by now have expired had the Consent Order been approved promptly, I allow a further 14 days prior to transfer of the claim for damages to the County Court in order to provide notice to both Parties. Since this has not been the subject of any submissions by the Parties, there shall be liberty to apply.

    (6) The costs order reflects the agreement of the Parties.

    Signed: Robert Palmer KC
    Date: 17 March 2025