ICR -v- Halton Borough Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-MAN-000318

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

11 July 2025

Before:

Kate Grange KC

Between:

ICR (by her mother and proposed litigation friend UPT)

-v-

Halton Borough Council

Order

On an application by the Claimant for anonymity and expedition

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant including the applications seeking anonymity and expedition

ORDER BY KATE GRANGE KC 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, the name of her brother and the name of the litigation friend are to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and
    ii) The Claimant, her brother, and the litigation friend are to be referred to orally and in writing as ‘ICR’, ‘ULX’ and ‘UPT’ respectively.
    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. Abridgement of time and expedition:
    a) Following service of any Acknowledgement of Service by the Defendant (or if no Acknowledgement of Service is filed within the 21 days) the papers are to be referred to a judge or deputy judge within 7 days thereafter for determination of permission for judicial review and (if considered necessary at that time) any orders for the further expedition of the claim.

REASONS

  1. Anonymity: The subject of these proceedings concerns a young child who is vulnerable and disabled and this claim involves highly personal information in relation to her.  There are no specific countervailing public interest reasons for revealing her identity and there are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1.
  2. Abridgement of time/expedition: In circumstances where the Claimant is a vulnerable child with complex needs who is currently not attending school and where there appears to have been a period of months where the provision in the EHCP has been requested, I consider that some measure of expedition is justified.  I am not prepared to abridge time for the provision of the Acknowledgement of Service, but I do consider that the court should determine the application for permission within 7 days once the Acknowledgement of Service has been received (or the time period in respect of that has expired if none is served).