JEH -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2024-CDF-000098

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

28 June 2024

Before:
Mr Justice Eyre

Between:
The King
on the application of
JEH

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department

ORDER

On an application by the Claimant for anonymisation and interim relief

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

AND UPON it appearing that non-disclosure of the identity of the Claimant is necessary in order to secure the proper administration of justice pursuant to rule 39.2(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and rules 5.4C of the Civil Procedure Rules

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Eyre

  1. The Claimant’s application for anonymity is granted, and pursuant to CPR Rule 5.4A-5.4D and Rule 39.2, with effect from the date of this order and until further order:

(a) The Claimant shall hereinafter be referred to in these proceedings as “JEH” and there shall be substituted for all purposes of this case, in place of references to the name of the Claimant, reference to “JEH”;

(b)  There shall be no publication of any name, address, picture or other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant as being the Claimant in these proceedings;

(c)  In paragraph (b) “publication” means communication to the public or any section of the public whether by way of report of the proceedings or otherwise. It includes publication in a newspaper or broadcast, or on the internet, by any person;

(d) The Defendant, and any party served with or given notice of the anonymity order, has permission to apply to discharge or vary that order. Any application for that purpose must be made in writing, on notice to all parties;

(e) Pursuant to CPR rule 5.4C a person who is not a 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: (i) the Claimant is referred to in those documents only as “JEH”; and (ii) any reference to the name of the Claimant be deleted from those documents;

(f) Any application for permission to inspect or obtain a non-anonymised version of a document must be made on notice to the Claimant and in accordance with CPR r.5.4C(6).

2. The Defendant may respond to the application for interim relief by 4.00pm on 4th July 2024.

3. The papers are to be referred to a judge or deputy judge of the Administrative Court for consideration of the Claimant’s application for interim relief on 5th July 204 or as soon as practicable thereafter.

4. The said referral is to be made even if at 4.00pm on 4th July 2024 there has been no response to the interim relief application from the Defendant.

5. In the event that the Defendant responds to the interim relief application before 5th July 2024 then the papers are to be referred to a judge or deputy judge of the Administrative Court for consideration of the Claimant’s application for interim relief as soon as practicable after the receipt of that response.

6. Costs reserved.

This order has been made without a hearing. Any party affected by this order may apply within 7 days of the service of this order on that party to have it set aside, varied, or stayed.  

Reasons

  1. Notwithstanding the strong public interest in open justice anonymisation is necessary in light of the Claimant’s status as a seeker of asylum.
  2. It is appropriate that the application for interim relief be considered expeditiously and I note that the same was served on the Defendant on 18th June 2024. However, it remains appropriate for the Defendant to be given a further period to respond to that application. In that regard it is of note that:

a) the interim relief sought seeks to require positive action from the Defendant;

b) the application for interim relief does not immediately appear sufficiently compelling to warrant granting the same without the Defendant having been given a further opportunity to respond. However, I emphasise that this does not mean that it will not be sufficiently compelling for such relief to be granted on further consideration and once the Defendant has had such an opportunity;

c) given that the order sought would require positive action from the Defendant the provision proposed by the Claimant for the Defendant to have permission to apply to set aside the order does not adequately protect the position of the Defendant.

3. The order I have made properly balances the need for expedition and the need for the Defendant to have a proper opportunity to respond.