NN -v- The Secretary of State for Defence and the National Crime Agency

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionOrder

Claim Number: AC-2024-LON-003019

In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court
In the matter of an application for judicial review

10 September 2024

Before:
Mr Justice Sheldon

Between:

The King
on the application of
NN

-v-

(1) The Secretary of State for Defence
(2) The National Crime Agency

Order

On an application by the Claimant for an expedited timetable for her claim
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Sheldon

  1. The Claimant in this action shall have anonymity until further order. No report or publication of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify the Claimant. The Claimant shall be identified henceforth as “NN”.
  2. No non-party may obtain a copy of the statement of case until the application for permission has been determined. At the same time as considering the application for permission, the Court should consider what if any orders should be made with respect to access to the statement of case under CPR 5.4C(4)
  3. Time for the Acknowledgment of Service and Summary Grounds of Defence shall be abridged to 14 days from service of these proceedings.
  4. The Defendants shall state whether they intend to apply for a Closed Material Procedure under s.6 Justice and Security Act 2013 as soon as possible and in any event within 14 days of service of these proceedings.
  5. Permission shall be determined by a Judge on the papers within 10 days of the deadline for filing of the Acknowledgement of Service and Summary Grounds of Defence, and the Judge shall consider what (if any) further expedition is required. This case is suitable for vacation business.
  6. The parties shall have liberty to apply to vary the terms of this order on giving at least 48 hours’ written notice to the other party.
    Form JR-MPA. Judicial Review. Miscellaneous Paper Application. Version September 2020
  7. Costs in the case

Reasons

  1. The Claimant is an Afghan national, and is presently living in Afghanistan with her two young daughters. The Claimant applied for relocation to the United Kingdom on 1 February 2022 pursuant to the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (“ARAP”). The Claimant’s husband was a former officer in the Afghan National police and for a period of time was directly employed, and paid, by the British Embassy in Kabul. He was killed in February 2021 whilst travelling to his office.
  2. The Claimant’s application under ARAP was acknowledged on 21 April 2022. In spite of repeated requests for a decision, no substantive decision has yet been made on the application. The Claimant has agreed extensions of time to respond to pre-action correspondence. It was intimated that a decision would be made by 27 August 2024. No decision was forthcoming. The delay in providing the Claimant with a decision is the subject of challenge by way of judicial review.
  3. I consider that the Defendants should be required to provide a response to the judicial review claim on an expedited basis, and thereafter for the application for judicial review to be considered expeditiously. There is real urgency in the matter. It is alleged that a letter has been issued by the Taliban (the governing party in Afghanistan) seeking her arrest; there are also more general difficulties for women in Afghanistan with respect to movement and so forth. The Claimant contends that she is in a vulnerable position.
  4. I therefore order the abridgement of time for filing the Defendants’ response and for the Defendants to state whether they intend to apply for a Closed Material Procedure. I also order expedition of the Court’s consideration of the application for permission.
  5. The Claimant requests anonymity. There is a substantial basis for this given the background to her claim and the matters that explain (paragraph 3 above) the urgency of the situation. These factors clearly outweigh any public interest in knowing the Claimant’s identity
  6. I also direct that the Claimant’s statement of case not be obtainable by non-parties until the application for permission has been determined. I consider that the Claimant requires this protection whilst the application is being considered, and this outweighs the public interest in knowing the details of the case. I consider that editing the statement of case (which might afford the Claimant necessary protection) will require considerable time and resource, and should not be required to be done at pace. The Judge considering the application for permission can determine whether that restriction should be maintained or if a different order such as an edited statement of case (or no order) should be made. In doing so, the judge may benefit from representations from the Defendants if they have something to say on the matter.
  7. If members of the press consider that the order for anonymity or the
    Form JR-MPA. Judicial Review. Miscellaneous Paper Application. Version September 2020
    order prohibiting access to the statement of case should be revisited, they have liberty to apply to vary the terms.
    Signed: Mr Justice Sheldon