OAO -v- London Borough of Hillingdon (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case No: CO/2498/2022

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

4 November 2022

The Honourable Mr Justice Lane

The Queen on the application of OAO (by his litigation friend Joshua Singer)
London Borough of Hillingdon

Upon the application of the claimant for interim relief
Notification of the Judge’s decision
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the claimant and the defendant

Order by the Honourable Mr Justice Lane

  1. Pursuant to CPR 39.2, there shall be no publication, without the leave of the court, of the name of the claimant or of any other particulars likely to lead to the claimant’s identification.
  2. The application for interim relief is refused.
  3. Pursuant to section 31A(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, the application for judicial review is transferred to the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber.


  1. The requirements for the grant of interim relief are not met in this case. The claimant is in a room of his own (as he wanted); he has Sudanese acquaintances with whom he can converse (albeit he asserts they are somewhat older than him); he is receiving treatment in respect of his mental health issues; he has a support worker; and he has the prospect of attending a local college. He has been assessed as being 25. Even allowing for a five-year margin of error, he would still be an adult on the defendant’s view. The evidence from Mr Verney concerning the Sudanese birth certificate is contentious. The balance of convenience is thus very much in favour of the defendant, bearing in mind the obvious dangers in placing someone who may be an adult in his mid-twenties with children.
  2. I consider the issue of permission to bring judicial review is best left to the UTIAC.