HR -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)
Administrative CourtHigh CourtQueen's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order
Case No: CO/2881/2022
In the High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division
31 August 2022
Gavin Mansfield QC
The Queen on the application of
Secretary of State for the Home Department
On an application by the Claimant for permission to apply for judicial review and for interim relief
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant
ORDER by Gavin Mansfield QC
1. The Claimant’s application for an anonymity order is granted under CPR r.39.2(4) and/or the general case management powers in CPR r.3.1(2). The Claimant in this action shall have anonymity until further order. No report or publication of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify the Claimant. Pursuant to CPR r.5.4(c), a person not a party to the proceedings may obtain a copy of the statement of case, judgment or order of the court records, only if the statement of case, judgment or order from the court has been anonymised. In the case title, the Claimant’s name shall be replaced by the initials ‘HR’. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of Court proceedings.
2. The Claimant shall file updated submissions in respect of its application for a stay pending determination of the claim in R (DK) v SSHD CO/4585/2020 by 4pm on 2 September 2022. If the Claimant no longer seeks a stay, that should be made clear in the submissions.
3. The Defendant shall file and serve any submissions in response to the Claimant’s application for interim relief and for a stay, and any evidence relied upon by 4pm on 7 September 2022.
4. The Claimant’s application for interim relief, for permission to apply for judicial review and for a stay shall be placed before a judge on or before 9 September 2022 for determination on the papers.
5. The parties shall have liberty to apply to vary the terms of this order giving at least 48 hours written notice to the other party.
1. The grant of anonymity is a minor and justified incursion into the principle of open justice given the Claimant’s status as an asylum seeker and the concerns for her private life and that of her three children.
2. The Claim Form appears to raise reasonably arguable grounds for judicial review, and potentially for interim relief. However, there is as yet no AOS from the Defendant and there has been no response to the interim application. On 12 August 2022 the Defendant’s solicitors were without instructions and I have seen no update since then. I have concerns as to the suitability of the accommodation in which the Claimant and her family are housed, but the situation is not so urgent as to warrant determining the applications in the absence of any response from the Defendant. The Defendant will be given further opportunity to respond but must now do so quickly. I have allowed 7 days for response and for the papers to be put before a Judge thereafter.
3. Linked to the issue of interim relief is the question of further conduct of the claim. If permission is granted the Claimant seeks a stay pending determination of R (DK) v SSHD CO/4585/2020, which is said to raise very similar issues. On enquiry of the Administrative Court staff, I have learned that an order was made by Mr CMG Ockelton in DK’s case, sealed on 8 July 2022 (a) vacating the trial listed for 13-14 July 2022; (b) staying the claim pending completion of steps set out in the order. The directions contemplate that either the claim will be settled or an application will need to be made to lift the stay. In the light of this order, it is unclear whether it would be appropriate to stay the current claim pending determination of DK’s case. Accordingly, I have directed that the Claimant gives an update on its position in respect of a stay.