LTN -v- Sutton London Borough Council (anonymity order)
Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order
Case number: AC-2026-LON-002577
In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court
In the matter of an application for judicial review
2 July 2026
Before:
Richard Wright KC,
sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge
Between:
The King
on the application of
LTN
(Claimant)
-v-
Sutton London Borough Council
(Defendant)
Order
On an application by the Claimant for anonymity, urgent consideration and interim relief
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant
ORDER BY RICHARD WRIGHT 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 LTN.
(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.
- The application for interim relief is adjourned, to be considered at the same time as the application for permission to apply for judicial review is considered.
- The Defendant shall file and serve their response to the application for interim relief at the same time as they file their Acknowledgement of Service in accordance with the requirements of CPR 54.8
- The application for permission to apply for judicial review shall be considered on the papers, together with the application for interim relief, at the earliest opportunity following expiry of the period provided at CPR 54.8A to file a Reply to the Acknowledgement of Service.
- Costs in the case.
REASONS
(1) Anonymity: The factual background to this claim concerns the young child of the Claimant. I consider that it is necessary to protect that child from identification through these proceedings and there are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1.
(2) Urgent consideration / application for interim relief: The Claimant seeks an abridged timetable and a 2-hour listing for an oral hearing of the application for interim relief. I do not consider that either of those is necessary or appropriate. On the face of the application it is plain that the underlying dispute between the Claimant and the Defendant is long standing. It is also clear that the Defendant has made various offers of accommodation to the Claimant, all of which she has declined. It is of course unfortunate that the Claimant is facing difficulties in contact with her daughter because her daughter cannot stay with her overnight, but again that is a difficulty of long standing and I do not consider that in and of itself it justifies this claim being prioritised over others. Similarly, there is no real explanation of why an oral hearing of the application for interim relief is necessary or appropriate. I see no reason why the application for interim relief cannot be dealt with on the papers at the same time as permission is considered with the benefit of a response from the Defendant to the applications.
Signed: Richard Wright KC
Date: 2nd July 2026