MKR -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2026-LON-002603

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

5 May 2026

Before:

The Hon. Mrs Justice Ellenbogen DBE

Between:

The King
on the application of
MKR
(Claimant/Applicant)

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department
(Defendant/Respondent)

Order

On an application by the Claimant for urgent interim relief, dated 5 June 2026

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by The Hon. Mrs Justice Ellenbogen DBE:

  1. The identity of the Claimant in these proceedings shall not be published.
  2. Pursuant to CPR Rule 39.2(4), there shall not be disclosed in any report of these proceedings, or other publication (by whatever medium) in relation to these proceedings, the name or address of the Claimant or any other matters which could lead to his identification.
  3. In any report of these proceedings, or other publication (by whatever medium) in relation to these proceedings, the Claimant shall be referred to as “MKR” and any matters which could lead to the identification of the Claimant shall be redacted.
  4. Pursuant to CPR Rule 5.4C:

(a) a person who is not a party to the proceedings may obtain a copy of a claim form, judgment or order from the court records only if the same has been anonymised and redacted in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Order;

(b) if a person who is not a party to the proceedings applies for permission to obtain a copy of any other document or communication, such application shall be on at least 7 days’ written notice to the Claimants;

(c) any interested party, whether or not a party to the proceedings, may apply to the Court to vary or revoke paragraphs 1 to 4(b) of this Order, provided that any such application is made on no fewer than 5 days’ prior written notice to the Claimant of the intention to make such an application.

  1. This Order shall be published on the website of the Judiciary of England and Wales pursuant to CPR r.39.2(5).
  2. Until further order of the court, the Respondent shall continue to provide the Claimant with financial support and accommodation under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, or with equivalent support.
  3. By 4:00pm on Wednesday 9 June 2026, the Respondent shall file and serve a response to the application for urgent interim relief.
  4. By 4:00pm on Friday 12 June 2026, the Applicant may file and serve any reply to the Respondent’s response.
  5. By no later than midday on Monday 15 June 2026, the file shall be restored to a judge of the Administrative Court for consideration of all then appropriate orders and/or directions, which may include the listing of a hearing at short notice to the parties.
  6. Costs reserved.

REASONS

  1. This application is before me as ‘immediates’ judge.
  2. By his claim for judicial review, the Applicant, a Libyan national, seeks to challenge the Respondent’s decision to terminate support under section 95 of the 1999 Act, in consequence of which he has been required to leave his accommodation by midday today. He states that he first learned of that decision, via the providers of his accommodation, on 28 May 2026 and was not served with effective notice of it by the Respondent until 4 June 2026. In the absence of the interim relief sought, it is said that the Applicant will become street homeless and destitute.
  3. Albeit initially contending that her decision to refuse the Applicant’s asylum/international protection claim dated 8 May 2026 had been sent to him on that date, shortly before 5:00pm yesterday the Respondent informed the Applicant’s solicitors that, owing to an administrative error, it had not in fact been served until 4 June. The decision letter notified the Applicant of his right of appeal, and that, pending a decision on appeal, he would not have to leave the UK.
  4. It is said that the Respondent failed to take legally adequate steps to notify the Applicant of her decision and to give adequate notice that he should seek other support. It is further said that support should continue pending the giving of adequate notice, enabling the Applicant to seek alternative support under section 4 of the 1999 Act prior to his eviction from his existing accommodation.
  5. On the material with which the court has been provided to date, there is a real issue to be tried. The court would be assisted by the Respondent’s response to the application, and the balance of convenience clearly favours the order made at paragraph 6 above pending receipt of that response and any reply to it, whereafter the court will consider the appropriate way forward.

Anonymity

6. The Applicant asserts that he is a refugee and is in fear of retaliation. As matters stand, I consider that an anonymity order is appropriate; the potentially competing rights to freedom of expression and a fair trial (the principle of open justice) being protected by the liberty to apply provision at paragraph 4(c), in which ‘any interested party’ would encompass representatives of the Press and other media. It may be that, when the matter is restored to a judge in accordance with paragraph 9 of the above orders, the merit in its continuation will be revisited.

    Signed: Mrs Justice Ellenbogen

    Dated: 05/06/26