MAO -v- First-Tier Tribunal (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2026-LON-001464

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

31 March 2026

Before:

The Hon. Mr Justice Mould

Between:

THE KING on the application of
MAO (by his litigation friend MTO)

-v-

First-Tier Tribunal

and

East Sussex County Council
(Interested party)

Order

On an application by the Claimant for urgent consideration, [interim relief and directions]

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Hon. Mr Justice Mould:

  1. Anonymity:
    (a) Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to 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 “MAO” and their litigation friend as “MTO”.
    (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 and serve a redacted copy of any statement of case already 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 and must then be served with the unredacted version;
    (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.
  2. The application for urgent interim relief is refused.

Reasons

Anonymity: The Claimant is a child (by their parent as litigation friend) with special educational needs. There are compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1.

Order: This application for urgent consideration is apparently founded upon a proposed claim for judicial review of directions orders made by the First-tier Tribunal on 24 February 2026 and 16 March 2026. Those orders concern a hearing which was to take place today – 30 March 2026. I can see no justification for this court granting such relief in relation to current proceedings in the FTT. If the Claimant considers that the FTT has acted or is acting unlawfully, he should pursue an application for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber), to which appeals on points of law from decisions of the FTT, including in cases concerning special educational needs, lie.