June 25, 2025

RWO -v- North Yorkshire Council (anonymity order)

Administrative Court High Court King's Bench Division Anonymity Order

Case number: AC-2025-LDS-000121

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

20 June 2025

Before:

The Hon. Mrs Justice Hill DBE

Between:

The King
on the application of
RWO
by his Mother and Litigation Friend, WPO

-v-

North Yorkshire Council

Order

On an application by the Claimant for urgent consideration, anonymity, expedition and directions

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Hon. Mrs Justice Hill DBE:

Anonymity:

(a) Under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and pursuant to s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998:

(i) the Claimant’s name 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 “RWO” and his mother and Litigation Friend, who is hereby appointed as such, as “WPO”.

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

(i) the parties must within 7 days file and serve a redacted copy of any statement of case already filed, omitting the name, address and any other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant;

(ii) if any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant, a redacted copy omitting that information must be filed at the same time and must then be served with the unredacted version;

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

(d) The Court’s CE-file system shall be clearly marked with the words “An anonymity order was made in this case on 20 June 2025 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.”

(e) Any person wishing to vary or discharge this Order must make an application, served on each party.

(f) Pursuant to CPR 39.2(5) and the Practice Guidance: Publication of Privacy and Anonymity Orders dated 16 April 2019 a copy of this order shall be published on the Judicial Website of the High Court of Justice (www.judiciary.uk). For that purpose, a court officer will send a copy of the order by email to the Judicial Office at judicialwebupdates@judiciary.uk.

Abridgement of time and expedition:

(a) The case is suitable for a substantial degree of expedition.

(b) The Defendant’s Acknowledgement of Service (CPR 54.8) must be filed and served by 4pm on 4 July 2025.

(d) The papers are to be referred to a Judge or Deputy Judge for a decision whether to grant permission to apply for judicial review or order a rolled-up hearing within 7 days thereafter.

The parties shall have liberty to apply to vary or set aside this order on two working days’ notice to the other parties.
Costs reserved.

REASONS

Anonymity: The Claimant is a 14-year-old child with complex special educational needs and disabilities. This case concerns sensitive details of his health and education. The case can be fully reported without him being named. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice made in paragraph 1 of the order.

Abridgement of time/expedition: The case concerns the special educational provision the Claimant requires. It is the Claimant’s case that the level of provision set out in section F of the Education and Health Care Plan dated 19 March 2025 is not being secured, despite negotiations between the parties since then. This was a revised plan directed by the First-tier Tribunal on 26 November 2024. The Claimant’s case is that as a result, he has no meaningful access to education, such that it is having a severe adverse effect on him and his mental health. The Defendant has not responded to the application for urgent consideration but was aware that it was being made. The Court of Appeal has emphasised that in cases involving the education of children and young people, “speed must be of the essence”: H v East Sussex County Council [2009] EWCA Civ 249; [2009] ELR 161, per Waller LJ at [13].

Signed: Mrs Justice Hill
Dated: 20 June 2025