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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case No: CO/4440/2022

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

28 November 2022

The Honourable Mrs Justice Heather Williams DBE

The King on the application of JXL
Secretary of State for the Home Department

On an application by the Claimant for anonymity and for expedition
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant


  1. The Claimant shall hereafter be referred to in these proceedings as JXL.
  2. Pursuant to CPR rule 39.2(4) there shall not be disclosed in any report of the proceedings the name or address of the Claimant or any details leading to his identification and the Claimant, if referred to, shall only be referred to as JXL.
  3. Pursuant to CPR 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 document has been anonymised such that: (a) the Claimant is referred to in those documents only as JXL; and (b) any reference to the names of the Claimant be deleted from those documents.
  4. The Defendant shall serve and file any Acknowledgement of Service, Summary Grounds of Defence and response to the Claimant’s application for interim relief by 4pm on 12 December 2022.
  5. Any reply by the Claimant, including on the question of interim relief, shall be served and filed by 4pm on 14 December 2022.
  6. The Claimant’s application for interim relief is to be heard on the first available date thereafter before the end of the current term. Time estimate 90 minutes.
  7. Any person affected by this Order may apply on one day’s written notice to the parties to have the Order set aside or varied.
  8. Costs reserved.


  1. I am satisfied that it is necessary to grant the Claimant anonymity and to make orders pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) and 5.4C given his claim for asylum.
  2. The Claimant challenges the lawfulness of his ongoing detention and applies for his release by way of interim relief. I am satisfied that a measure of expedition is appropriate given the length of his detention and the medical conditions referred to. However, this is not a case of utmost urgency and I must balance the Claimant’s position with giving the Defendant a fair opportunity to respond and with the competing calls on the Court’s resources. I have given directions that will lead to a hearing of the interim relief application before the end of term. The timetable for consideration of permission can be addressed at that stage.