LL and AU -v- Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2025-MAN-000188

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

14 May 2025

Before:

His Honour Judge Pearce sitting as a Judge of the High Court

Between:

Rex on the application of
LL

AU

-v-

Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council

Order

UPON the Claimants’ application for judicial review

AND UPON considering the Claimants’ application for expedition and anonymity, including the supporting evidence filed with the applications

IT IS ORDERED:-

Anonymity

  1. The Claimants’ names and the name of the Second Claimant’s daughter shall be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in open court.
  2. There is to be substituted for all purposes in these proceedings in place of references to the Claimants by name, and whether orally or in writing, references to their respective ciphers
    a. The First Claimant’s cipher is to be “LL”.
    b. The Second Claimant’s cipher is to be “AU”.
  3. The Second Claimant’s daughter will be known for all purposes in these proceedings in place of references to her by name, and whether orally or in writing, by the cipher “B”.
  4. Pursuant to section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and CPR Rule 39.2(4), there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimants or the Second Claimant’s daughter or any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimants or the Second Claimant’s daughter in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.
  5. Pursuant to CPR 5.4C
    a. The parties must, when filing any statement of case, also file a redacted copy of the statement of case omitting the name, address and any other information which could lead to the identification of the Claimants or Second Claimant’s daughter.
    b. Unless the Court grants permission no non-party may obtain an unredacted copy of any statement of case or any other document which would identify LL, AU or B, and any application for permission must be made on notice to the parties
  6. The Court file shall be clearly marked with the words “An anonymity order was made in this case on [date of this Order] and any application by a non-party to inspect or obtain a copy document from this file must be dealt with in accordance with the terms of that Order.”
  7. Paragraphs 1 to 6 of this Order shall be known as the “Anonymity Provisions”.
  8. Any person wishing to apply to vary or discharge the Anonymity Provisions must make an application to the Court, served on each party.
  9. The Court will consider whether to grant permission to the Claimants to proceed within 14 days of the acknowledgment of service being filed or expiry of the deadline for filing acknowledgment of service, whichever is earlier.
  10. Any renewal hearing (if required) shall take place within 14 days of any refusal of permission.
  11. Should permission be granted or a rolled-up hearing directed, the substantive hearing is to take place on the first available date after 1 July 2025 and to commence no later than 30 July 2025, before a Judge of the High Court, with a time estimate of 1 day.

Reasons

  1. In my judgment, the Claimants’ application both for anonymity and for expedition as set out in their Application Notice of 1 May 2025 are made out for the reasons given there.
  2. Whilst I can see merit in any hearing of the substantive application for judicial review being before a full time High Court Judge, I am unclear whether the sitting diary will permit this, hence I have not made an order to that effect. The issue should be considered when permission is dealt with.