R (SXQ) -v- Leeds City Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case Number: CO/1376/2023

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

26 June 2023

Before:
The Honourable Mrs Justice Hill
In the matter of an application for judicial review

Between:
The King
On The Application Of
SXQ
-v-
Leeds City Council

Anonymity Order

UPON considering the Claimant’s application for anonymity dated 17 April 2023

PURSUANT TO section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and Rule 39.2(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules

ANONMYITY ORDER made by the Honourable Mrs Justice Hill

  1. Identification of the Claimant is prohibited, pursuant to CPR r.39.2, and the Claimant is to be known as SXQ throughout proceedings.
  2. There be substituted for all purposes of this case, in place of references to the Claimant by name, and whether orally or in writing, references to SXQ.
  3. In so far as necessary, any statement of case or other document disclosing the Claimant’s name already filed in the proceedings be replaced by a document describing such name in anonymised form as above.
  4. Pursuant to CPR Rules 5.4C and 5.4D a person who is not a party to the proceedings may not obtain a copy of a statement of case, judgment or order from the Court records unless the statement of case, judgment or order has been anonymised in accordance with the direction above.
  5. The Court file shall be clearly noted with the words “An anonymity order was made in this case on 9 June 2023 and any application by a non-party to inspect or obtain a copy document from this file must be dealt with in accordance with the terms of that Order.”
  6. Reporting restrictions apply as to the disclosing of any information that may lead to the subsequent identification of the Claimant.
  7. Any non-party affected by this order may apply on notice to all parties to have the order set aside or varied.
  8. Costs reserved.

Reasons

  1. The Claimant is, on their case, a child. The particular need for the protection of the identity of children in legal proceedings is recognised by statute (the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, section 39) and case law.
  2. This claim will necessarily involve consideration of personal information relating to the Claimant’s vulnerabilities, health, contact with social services and family relationships. Publication of such personal information is likely to be harmful to the Claimant and their development. The Claimant’s rights under Article 8 are engaged.
  3. The case can accurately be reported by the media without the need to refer to the Claimant’s identity.
  4. In all the circumstances I am satisfied that (i) anonymity is reasonable, necessary to protect the interests of the Claimant (applying the approach set out by the Court of Appeal in XXX v Camden LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 1468), and proportionate; (ii) the limited intrusion into the open justice principle effected by such anonymity is justified; and (iii) having regard to the Article 10 rights of the media, there is insufficient countervailing public interest in disclosure of the Claimant’s identity to justify interfering with their Article 8 rights by naming them.