MMB -v- Borough of Tedford & Wrekin Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

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

14 November 2024

Before:

Her Honour Judge Carmel Wall sitting as a Judge of the High Court

Between:

The King on the application of
MMB (a child)

-v-

Borough of Tedford & Wrekin Council

Order

On an application made by the Claimant dated 8 November 2024

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by her Honour Judge Carmel Wall sitting as a Judge of the High Court

1. The application by the Claimant for anonymity is granted. The Claimant shall hereafter be referred to in these proceedings as “MMB”.

2. Until further Order the Claimant’s name is not to be disclosed in these proceedings in open court.

3. Any report of these proceedings must not identify the Claimant by name, must not publish any particulars calculated to identify the Claimant by name and must not publish any photograph of the Claimant.

4. Any person seeking to vary paragraphs 1 – 3 of this Order may apply to do so on 48 hours’ notice.

5. The application to dispense with a litigation friend is granted and pursuant to CPR 21.2(3) the Claimant may conduct these proceedings without a litigation friend.

6. The application to expedite the claim is granted. The time for filing the Acknowledgement of Service together with any response to the application for interim relief is abridged to 14 days from the date of this Order. On receipt of the Acknowledgement of Service or on expiry of this time limit, whichever is the sooner, the application must be referred to a Judge for consideration of the Claimant’s application for permission and interim relief.

7. This Order has been made without a hearing and without service on the Defendant. Any party affected may apply to set aside, vary or stay this Order within 7 days of service.

8. Costs reserved.

Reasons

  1. The central issue raised by this claim is the accuracy of the age assessment of the Claimant relied on by the Defendant in the performance of its statutory duties. The Claimant is an asylum-seeker who arrived in the UK on 11 August 2024. He asserts he was born on 5 October 2009 and so is aged 15. The Defendant is treating him as an adult. Until resolution of that central issue, it is appropriate to treat the Claimant as a child for procedural purposes.
  2. On the assumption that the Claimant is aged 15, I am satisfied that his right to privacy is necessary to protect his interests and outweighs any public interest in identifying him by name. There are no sufficient countervailing factors so far disclosed in this case that support any contrary conclusion.
  3. The Claimant’s solicitors have expressed the view that they are able to take instructions directly from the Claimant without the need for a litigation friend; that the Claimant can understand the proceedings; and can weigh up advice. He has given instructions to enable a witness statement to be prepared. There is no obvious person who could perform the role of litigation friend so as to provide real and additional assistance to the Claimant. On the assumption he is aged 15, I accept that the appointment of a litigation friend is not currently necessary, but this should be kept under review.
  4. I accept there is a genuine need for this claim to be considered urgently and that it is appropriate to abridge time. On the assumption the Claimant is aged 15, he is not being suitably accommodated and is being deprived of the safeguards and support which the Defendant would, in those circumstances, have a duty to provide.