IAM -v- Sheffield City Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-LDS-000073

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

27 August 2025

Before:

DHCJ Alan Bates

Between:

The King on the application of
IAM

-v-

Sheffield City Council

Order

On the Court’s consideration of the papers for the purpose of determining whether to grant permission to apply for judicial review (CPR 54.11, 54.12)

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER BY ALAN BATES, SITTING AS A DEPUTY JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT

  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 “IAM”.
    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):
    i) the parties must within 7 days file a redacted copy of any statement of case filed, omitting the name, address and any other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant;
    ii) if any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant, a redacted copy omitting that information must be filed at the same time;
    iii) 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. Confirmation that the claim has been properly served on the Defendant:
    The Claimant must do one or other of the following two things by 4 p.m. on 3rd September 2025:
    a) File and serve a short witness statement, verified by a statement of truth, confirming how and when the claim was served on the Defendant – including, specifically, any email address used for effecting electronic service – and setting out the basis on which the Claimant was entitled to serve the claim by that method.
    b) Serve the claim on the Defendant and then confirm such service by way of filing a new Certificate of Service.
  3. Defendant to file an Acknowledgement of Service:
    The Defendant must do one or other of the following two things by 4 p.m. on 10th September 2025:
    a) File and serve an Acknowledgement of Service.
    b) Send a short letter or email to the Administrative Court (Leeds) confirming that the Defendant has elected not to file an Acknowledgement of Service.
  4. Consideration of permission to apply for judicial review:
    The question of whether to grant permission to apply for judicial review, together with the Claimant’s application for interim relief, will be considered by Alan Bates, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court, on the papers on or after 11th September 2025.
  5. Service of this order:
    The Claimant must serve a copy of this order on the Defendant by sending it to the Defendant by email at the following two email addresses: adam.millward@sheffield.gov.uk and Kate.Hyland@sheffield.gov.uk .

REASONS

  1. Although the Defendant provided a detailed response to the Claimant’s Pre-Action Protocol (“PAP”) letter, the Court has not received an Acknowledgement of Service from the Defendant.  At present, I am not satisfied that I can safely proceed on the basis that the Defendant has been properly served with the claim but has chosen not to file an Acknowledgement of Service.  The Certificate of Service filed by the Claimant’s solicitors, dated 7 April 2025, indicates that service was effected by email to the email address adam.millward@sheffield.gov.uk .  But that email address is not the same as the email address shown on the Defendant’s PAP Response letter, and I presently do not know whether the Claimant had a proper basis for effecting (or purporting to effect) service using that email address.
  2. In the circumstances, I have given directions for ensuring that the Defendant has been duly served with the claim and that the Defendant either files an Acknowledgement of Service or confirms that it has elected not to do so.