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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: CO/2821/2023

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

4 August 2023


David Pittaway sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge


The King on the application of


Secretary of State for the Home Department


On an application by the Claimant for directions and/or interim relief
UPON considering the N461, the Statement of Facts and Grounds, the N463 and the Submissions in support of the Claimant’s application for urgent interim relief
ORDER by DAVID PITTAWAY KC Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge

  1. The Claimant’s application for an anonymity order is granted under CPR r 39.2(4) and/or the general case management powers in CPR r. 3.1(2). 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. Pursuant to CPR r.5.4(c), a person not a party to the proceedings may obtain a copy of the statement of case, judgment or order of the court records, only if the statement of case, judgment or order from the court has been anonymised. In the case title, the Claimant’s name shall be replaced by the initials ‘NRA’, and the Claimant’s son’s name by the initial ‘S’. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of Court proceedings.
  2. The Defendant shall file and serve any submissions in response to the Claimant’s application for urgent interim relief, and any evidence relied on in support of the Defendant’s position, within 7 days of the date of this Order.
  3. The Claimant’s application for urgent interim relief is to be listed to be heard at an on-notice oral hearing for 2 hours as soon as practicable thereafter.
  4. The claim is suitable for vacation business.
  5. Liberty to apply.
  6. Costs reserved.


  1. The Claimant seeks permission to challenge the ongoing failure by the Defendant to provide her and her son with adequate accommodation under s.95-96 and 122 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.
  2. She is an Iraqi national who arrived in the UK on 9 October 2022 with her 4 year old and claimed asylum. On 1 November 2022 she was granted s.95 support. They have been staying in the Ruskin Arms Hotel in London since 16 December 2022. Due to her and her son’s mental health difficulties, she maintains that hotel/shared accommodation is inadequate.
  3. She suffers from mental health issues and her son has complex needs, including PTSD. There are medical assessments included in the papers before me, supporting provision of self-contained non-shared accommodation with a private kitchen and living area for their sole use. On 21 July 2023 the Defendant informed her that the Home Office Medical Adviser believed the shared accommodation offered was suitable. A review of this decision has been sought and received no response.
  4. In my view the application for interim relief should be determined at an oral hearing as soon as is practicable after the Defendant’s submissions are filed. There are clearly issues on the papers as to whether this case meets the threshold for a mandatory injunction.