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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2026-LON-000139

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

Case number: 24 April 2026

Before:

Marcus Pilgerstorfer KC,
Deputy High Court Judge

Between:

The King
on the application of
SLT
(by his mother and litigation friend)

-v-

The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Order

On an application by the Claimant for an Order for Anonymity

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER BY MARCUS PILGERSTORFER KC, DEPUTY HIGH COURT JUDGE

  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 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 SLT.

(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 (such as the names or details of his family members) in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.

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

(i) the parties must within 7 days file a redacted copy of any statement of case 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;

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

REASONS

(1) Anonymity: The Claimant in this case is a child who acts by his mother and litigation friend. The subject matter of this claim engages the Claimant’s Article 8 ECHR rights to privacy. Against that there is a strong public interest in open justice and in safeguarding rights protected by Article 10 ECHR. In this case, I am satisfied that it is necessary to derogate from the principle of open justice to the limited extent set out in this order in order to give effect to the Claimant’s rights to privacy.

Signed: Marcus Pilgerstorfer KC, DHCJ

Date: 24 April 2026