SAK -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtQueen's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Ref: CO/1531/2022

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

Date: 05/05/2022

HHJ Sephton QC

The Queen on the application of SAK
Secretary of State for the Home Department

Order by HHJ Sephton QC, sitting as a judge of the High Court
Upon consideration of the application for permission to seek judicial review and the application for interim relief
And upon consideration of the claimant’s Article 8 right to respect for private and family life and the Article10 right to freedom of expression
And upon it appearing that non-disclosure of the identity of the claimant is necessary in order to protect the interests of the claimant
And pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) and Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and CPR rules 5.4C and 5.4D

1. The identity of the claimant be not disclosed.
2. The claimant be described in all statements of case and other documents to be filed or served in the proceedings and in any judgment or order in the proceedings and in any report of the proceedings by the press or otherwise as “SAK”.
3. Insofar 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. A non-party may not inspect or obtain a copy of any document on or from the court file (other than this order, duly anonymised as directed) without the permission of a Master or District Judge. Any application for such permission must be made on notice to the claimant and the court will effect service.
5. Any person affected by paragraphs 1 – 4 of this order may apply on not less than 72 hours’ notice to all parties to have this order varied or set aside.
The applications provide credible evidence that the claimant is vulnerable and that this application concerns three children. I note that the practice in UTIAC is to grant anonymity to asylum seekers such as the claimant. I am satisfied that the claimant’s right to privacy and family life (and that of her children, who feature in the case) is sufficient to displace the important principle that justice should be done in public. Paragraph 5 of the order provides an important safeguard lest any person wish to challenge the principle of anonymity.
6. The application for interim relief shall be considered on the papers on the first available date after 19 May 2022.
7. The defendant must before 4pm on 16 May 2022 file and serve any witness statement and skeleton argument upon which she wishes to rely in response to the application for interim relief. If she fails to do so, the application for interim relief will be considered on the basis of the claimant’s application only.
This application must be considered promptly.
I note that the defendant has not responded substantively to the claimant’s correspondence. I have not been told that the defendant is on notice of the application for interim relief. It is, therefore, appropriate to give the defendant a short period in which to respond to the application. If she does not do so promptly, then the application will have to be considered without the benefit of evidence or submissions from the defendant.