M -v- Kent County Council (anonymity order)
Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order
Case number: CO/1587/2023
In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
3 May 2023
The Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE
The King on the application of
M (by her mother and litigation friend, N)
Kent County Council
On the Claimant’s application for an anonymity order, expedition, directions, abridgment of time for filing the Acknowledgment of Service and a rolled-up hearing;
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant;
Order by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE
- Pursuant to CPR r.39.2, in any report of these proceedings, there shall be no publication of the name and address of the Claimant and her litigation friend, nor any other particulars likely to lead to their identification. In the proceedings, the Claimant shall be anonymised and referred to as “M” and the litigation friend shall be anonymised and referred to as “N”.
- Within 14 days of the date of this order, the Claimant’s solicitors shall file with the Court copies of case documents which have been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimant and her litigation friend, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
- Non-parties may not obtain any documents from the court file which have not been anonymised and/or redacted to protect the identity of the Claimant and her litigation friend, in accordance with paragraph 1 above.
- The Defendant shall file its Acknowledgment of Service and Summary Grounds of Resistance not more than 21 days after the date of service of the claim form.
- The application for permission is to be expedited so as to be considered by a Judge on the papers within 14 days from the date of filing of the Acknowledgment of Service, together with the application for a rolled-up hearing and for expedition.
- Liberty to apply to vary or discharge this order on 2 days notice to the
- Costs reserved.
An anonymity order has been granted, as the Claimant is a disabled child. In the circumstances, a departure from the general principle of open justice is justified.
The Claimant has complex needs. This claim has a long history; the Claimant’s mother has engaged with the Defendant since May 2022 in an attempt to resolve the lack of special educational provision. The Education, Health and Care Plan is now out of date. In these circumstances, I consider that the Defendant is likely to need the standard time period of 21 days to finalise the type of detailed defence which is required in a case such as this. Therefore I have not abridged time for filing the Acknowledgment of Service. I have ordered expedited consideration of the permission application by a Judge, bearing in mind the volume of work in the Court.
The permission Judge should decide whether or not to grant the application for a rolled-up hearing and the application for expedition, with the benefit of having seen the Defendant’s Summary Grounds of Defence.