PXQ -v- Family Court at Preston (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2026-LDS-000087

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

7 August 2026

Before:

Marcus Pilgerstorfer KC,
Deputy Judge of the High Court

Between:

The King
on the application of
PXQ
(Claimant)

-v-

Family Court at Preston
(Defendant)

and

IXT
(Interested Party)

Order

UPON the Claimant having renewed his application for permission to proceed with his claim for judicial review

AND UPON consideration of the documents filed by the Claimant, including the Claimant’s skeleton argument

AND UPON the Court having heard the Claimant in person at a hearing held on 7 August 2026 at the Leeds Combined Court Centre, 1 Oxford Row, Leeds LS1 3BG

AND UPON it appearing to the Court that the Interested Party had not properly been served with the sealed claim form

AND UPON the Court considering it appropriate (for reasons given orally) to make an anonymity order by way of limited derogation from the open justice principle covering the Claimant, the Interested Party and their children due to the subject matter of proceedings concerning decisions reached in the Family Court and the Article 8 ECHR rights of the Interested Party and the children

AND UPON the Court having given an oral judgment;

ORDER BY MARCUS PILGERSTORFER KC, DEPUTY JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT

  1. Anonymity:

(a) Pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) and/or the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and/or s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998:

(i) the Claimant’s name, the name of the Interested Party, and the names of their children is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and

(ii) the Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as PXQ.

(iii) the Interested Party is to be referred to orally and in writing as IXT.

(b) Pursuant to s. 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant, Interested Party, or their children or of any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant, the Interested Party, or their children in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.

(c) Pursuant to CPR 5.4C(4):

(i) in the event of an application by a non-party to obtain a copy of a statement of case, the Claimant must, within 7 days of being notified by the Court, file a redacted copy of his statement of case as filed but omitting the name, address and any other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant, the Interested Party and their children;

(ii) unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non-party many obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.

(d) Any person wishing to vary or discharge this Order must make an application, served on the Claimant and the Interested Party.

  1. Time Limits: The Claimant’s claim, filed on 7 April 2026, is brought out outside the time period set by CPR r54.5(1) given that it seeks to challenge the decision of HHJ Harrison dated 20 June 2025. The Claimant’s application for an extension of time to bring these proceedings is refused.
  2. Jurisdiction: The Court declines jurisdiction to entertain this claim (i) by reason of paragraph 2 above; and (ii) because the Claimant has failed to serve the sealed claim form properly on the Interested Party as required by CPR r54.7 and 54PD6 and no grounds for an extension of time to do so are made out.
  3. Permission: Permission to apply for judicial review is refused.
  4. Costs: No order as to costs.

Signed: Marcus Pilgerstorfer KC,
Deputy Judge of the High Court

Date: 7 August 2026