June 16, 2026

LHS -v- Cambridgeshire County Council (anonymity order)

Administrative Court High Court King's Bench Division Anonymity Order

Case number: AC-2026-LON-002660

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

15 June 2026

Before:

Richard Clayton KC,
sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge

Between:

The King
on the application of
LHS
(by his litigation friend, LCN)

-v-

Cambridgeshire County Council

Order

On an application by the Claimant for anonymity, for urgent consideration and for interim relief.

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER BY RICHARD CLAYTON KC SITTING AS A DEPUTY HIGH COURT JUDGE

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 LHS and his litigation friend is to be referred to orally and in writing as LCN.

(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.

(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.

The Urgent Consideration Application: The Application is granted..

Expedition, Abridgement of time and interim relief: The claim shall be expedited.

(a) The Defendant shall file and serve its Acknowledgement of Service together with Summary Grounds of Resistance (CPR 54.8) within 14 days of service of this Order.

(b) The Claimant shall file his Reply CPR 54.8A), if so advised, no later than 5 days thereafter.

(c) The Defendant’s decision dated 3 June 2026 to amend the Claimant’s Education, Health and Care Plan and to allocate the Claimant a place at Soham Village College is stayed pending the final determination of this claim or further order of the Court.

(d) The Defendant shall not take any steps to implement or enforce the placement of the Claimant at Soham Village College (including by way of admission or transition arrangements) pending the final determination of this claim or further order of the Court.

(e) The case shall be listed for an oral hearing for permission and/or interim relief before a Judge or Deputy Judge for 13 July 2026 or so soon thereafter as is practicable, with a time estimate of 2 hours.

(f) The Claimant must file and serve:

(i) a skeleton argument, maximum 10 pages no later than 12 pm on 3 July 2026.

(ii) an electronic bundle containing any authorities which the Court needs to read at the hearing (the Authorities Bundle: see para. 22.1.2 of the Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide); and

(iii) if requested by the Court, a hard copy version of the Permission Hearing Bundle and Authorities Bundles.

(g) The Defendant must file and serve any skeleton argument, maximum 10 pages no later than 4 pm on 8 July 2026.

(h) Liberty to apply – Any party has liberty to apply to vary or discharge this Order on 48 hours’ written notice to the other party.

REASONS

(1) Anonymity: The Claimant has complex and significant special education needs. His EHCP (on both 22 April 2026 and 3 June 2026) records at Section B that his early experience of being disadvantaged and in care means he needs very specific understanding and support, especially focused on his trauma and attachment needs The claim relies on personal medical information in which the Claimant and his litigation friend have reasonable expectation of privacy. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1.

(2) The Urgent Consideration Application: The Application is granted for the following reasons:
a. The new academic year commences on 1 September 2026 – only approximately 12 weeks from the date of this application. The Claimant, a highly vulnerable 11-year-old child with complex special educational needs, is due to transfer from primary to secondary education on that date. The Defendant has already purported to allocate him a place at Soham Village College (a mainstream secondary school) from that date.
b. The Claimant has profound and complex needs including Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder, significant learning disability, executive functioning difficulties, Sensory Processing Disorder, hyperacusis (extreme sensitivity to sound), joint hypermobility, dyscalculia, toileting difficulties, and a background of early trauma and attachment difficulties arising from his time in care. His own EHCP (dated 22 April 2026) records that he requires “extensively trained and nurturing, compassionate and empathetic” support with “good, attuned relationships” that are “fundamental to [his] success” and have “a dramatic impact on his ability to achieve in school and on his anxiety levels and behaviours.”
c. The Defendant’s unilateral amendment of the EHCP on 3 June 2026 changed the placement type from “Special School” (as determined in the Defendant’s own final EHCP issued only six weeks earlier on 22 April 2026) to naming Soham Village College as a mainstream secondary placement. This amendment was made: (i) without any notice to the Claimant or his parents; (ii) without issuing any draft amended EHCP; (iii) without affording the parents any opportunity to make representations; (iv) without any evidential basis or assessment justifying the change; and (v) in direct contradiction of the Defendant’s own recent final determination that a Special School placement type was appropriate.
d. The 3 June 2026 decision letter fails to notify the parents of their statutory right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) or of the right to request mediation. This is a serious procedural defect that prejudices the parents’ ability to exercise their legal rights in a timely manner.
e. Without urgent judicial intervention, the Claimant faces immediate and irreparable prejudice: (i) He will be placed in an unsuitable mainstream secondary school environment that his own EHCP states is unlikely to be able to meet his needs for trauma-informed, nurturing, specialist support. (ii) He has already been deprived of any meaningful transition planning due to the Defendant’s delays and the sudden unilateral change of placement type. (iii) Placement in a large mainstream secondary school is likely to cause significant harm to his education, emotional regulation, anxiety levels, and overall development, given his documented sensitivities to noise (hyperacusis), fire alarms, lockdowns, and interactions with peers. (iv) The window for proper, evidence-based transition planning is rapidly closing. Any delay in resolving this claim will make effective relief impossible or substantially more difficult to achieve before September 2026.
f. This is not a case where the normal judicial review timetable can be followed. By the time a standard permission By the time a standard permission decision and substantive hearing could be listed under the usual timetable, the new school year will have begun and Max will already be in an unsuitable placement suffering ongoing harm. The harm is not merely financial or administrative – it goes to the core of a vulnerable child’s education, mental health, and future life chances.
g. The Defendant has already demonstrated a pattern of serious delay and procedural failure in this very matter (missing the statutory 15 February 2026 deadline for phase transfer amendments, extended periods of non- communication, repeated errors in consultation paperwork, and now a
fundamentally defective unilateral amendment). There is a real risk that without court intervention the Defendant will continue to act in a manner prejudicial to the Claimant’s interests.

(3) Abridgement of time, expedition and interim relief: I have abridged time and ordered expedition and interim relief for the reasons set out for is granting the Urgent Consideration Application.

Signed: RICHARD CLAYTON KC
Date: 15 June 2026