MK -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)
Case No: CO/1584/2022
In the High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division
Administrative Court
Date: 08/07/2022
Before:
His Honour Judge Dight CBE, sitting as a Judge of the High Court
Between:
The Queen on the application of
MK
-v-
Secretary of State for the Home Department
On an application by the Claimant for anonymity and interim relief
And on an application by the Defendant dated 27 June 2022 for a further extension of time to file her Acknowledgment of Service
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Defendant
ORDER by His Honour Judge Dight CBE, sitting as a Judge of the High Court
1. the identity of the Claimant be not disclosed and they shall be referred to by the initials MK in these proceedings;
2. the Defendant be granted a final extension of time to file and serve her Acknowledgment of Service, namely to 4pm 18 July 2022, failing which permission to seek Judicial Review on all the grounds advanced by the Claimant be granted;
3. the Defendant do pay the Claimant’s costs of her application dated 27 June 2022, subject to summary assessment on the papers if not agreed;
4. if the Defendant files an Acknowledgment of Service in accordance with paragraph 2 above the papers shall be put before a single judge to consider the application for permission for Judicial Review and interim relief;
5. because this order has been made without a hearing there be permission to both parties to vary or discharge it so long as any such application is made within 7 days of the date of this order.
Reasons
1. The applicant is a 43 year old asylum seeker who alleges human trafficking and, it is accepted by the Defendant, suffers from mental health problems which require the Claimant to be accommodated within reasonable distance of appropriate mental health services.
2. I consider that non-disclosure of the Claimant’s identity is necessary to protect the interests of the Claimant and for the proper administration of justice.
3. The Defendant, who has been granted one extension of time for her AoS, seeks a further extension on the basis that this Claim is capable of being settled, which would be a better use of public funds than continued litigation. I agree, although there has to be a long stop.