MP -v- Secretary of State for Defence (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: CO/2514/2023

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

7 July 2023


The Honourable Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb DBE


The King on the application of


Secretary of State for Defence


MP2-MP5 (Interested parties)


On an application by Claimant for Anonymity, Urgent Consideration, an Abridged Timetable prior to the Permission stage
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant
ORDER by the Honourable Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb DBE

  1. Urgent consideration is granted.
  2. Anonymity for the Claimant and the Interested parties (his family) granted for the purpose of this Order as prima facie the same position exists as at the time of the Anonymity Order made by Ritchie J in March 2023.
  3. The Defendant shall file and serve and Acknowledgment of Service and Summary Grounds of Defence within 7 days of this Order.
  4. The Claimant shall have permission to file a reply, if so advised, within 3 days after receipt of the Acknowledgement of Service.
  5. The application for permission for judicial review shall be put before a Judge for a decision on the papers within 14 days of this Order.
  6. Costs reserved.


  1. The reasons for this order will be obvious to the Defendant. I refer the Defendant to the decision granting permission to apply for judicial review made by Mr Justice Ritchie on 6 March 2023.
  2. Anonymity is justified and fair given the nature of the Claimant’s situation and background, and the Defendant’s previous neutrality on the question. If necessary, it can be considered further by the Judge deciding whether to grant permission.
  3. The Defendant compromised the application for judicial review earlier this year, but his latest decision is impugned on similar grounds to those considered by Ritchie J. In any event the material upon which an Acknowledgement of Service will be based will be to hand and easily assembled. On the other hand, the Claimant and his family are in the same deleterious position they faced at the start of 2023.
  4. The proper interpretation of “working alongside” a UK Government department has not been engaged with in the recent decision I have seen.