Case No: CO/1784/2022
In the High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division
His Honour Judge Dight CBE, sitting as a Judge of the High Court
The Queen on the application of
London Borough of Brent
On an application by the Claimant for an extension of time to file and serve grounds for judicial review
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Defendant
ORDER by His Honour Judge Dight CBE, sitting as a Judge of the High Court
1. Pursuant to CPR r. 39.2, the identity of the Claimant shall not be disclosed and the matter be known for the time being as R (S) v London Borough of Brent.
2. The Claimant be permitted to conduct proceedings without a litigation friend until further order.
3. The Claimant to file and serve his detailed Grounds of Judicial Review, amended Claim Form, any accompanying evidence, any application for interim relief and/or expedition, together with a certificate of suitability seeking appointment of a litigation friend by 4pm on 19 July 2022
4. The costs of this application be the Defendant’s costs in the application for permission for judicial review.
5. There be permission to the parties to apply to vary or discharge this order so long as any such application is made within 7 days of the date of this order.
1. The Claimant is an Afghan asylum seeker (who speaks no English) who challenges the Defendant’s age assessment in a report dated 18 February 2022 in which it concluded that the Claimant is an adult between 23 and 25 years old. The Claimant issued this Claim on 13 May 2022 to ensure that it was within 3 months of the challenged decision but the pre-action protocol had not then been followed. The Claimant is awaiting a decision from the Official Solicitor as to representation of the Claimant. He also asks that the Claim be anonymised.
2. A review was undertaken by the Defendant in light of the Claimant’s detailed pre-action protocol letter which was sent after commencement of these proceedings. The original assessment was confirmed by the Defendant in an addendum decision dated 16 June 2022.
3. The Defendant objects to the application and invites the court to dismiss the Claim.
4. The Claimant plainly needs time to obtain advice in light of the addendum decision and (re)formulate his grounds for seeking Judicial Review. It would be wasteful of costs and lead to delay if this Claim were now to be dismissed and the Claimant were to be required to commence fresh proceedings.
5. These orders, including the anonymity order, are made on the premise, which might subsequently prove to be unarguable, that the Claimant is a minor.