Social Work England -v- LDH (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2026-LDS-000130

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

1 July 2026

Before:

Marcus Pilgerstorfer KC,
Deputy High Court Judge

Between:

The King
on the application of
Social Work England
(Claimant)

-v-

LDH
(Defendant)

Order

On an application by the Claimant dated 2 June 2026

And upon 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 Defendant’s name is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and

(ii) the Defendant is to be referred to orally and in writing as LDH; and

(iii) the Defendant’s child is to be referred to orally and in writing as Child A.

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

(c) Pursuant to CPR 5.4C:

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

(ii) subject to sub-paragraph (iii) below, any application by a non-party under CPR 5.4C to obtain documents other than the claim form, judgment or order given in public, is to be made on at least 14 days’ notice to the parties. Before the Court considers any such application the parties are to be given the opportunity to respond to the application (including proposals for editing/ redacting sensitive content).

(iii) Any person has liberty to apply in writing on notice to the parties to abridge the time for notice in sub-paragraph (ii) above.

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

  1. Costs: No order as to costs.

REASONS

(1) By application of 2 June 2026, C applies for orders that:

(a) The hearing of the application for an extension to the interim suspension be heard in private (CPR 39.2(3))
(b) Non-disclosure of the identity of D and her minor child (CPR 39.2(4))
(c) Notice be given of a non-party applying to obtain documents (CPR 5.4C(2)).

(2) The substantive application to extend the interim order has since been dealt with by consent: see the Order approved on 18 June 2026. No further hearing falls to be listed. It is therefore unnecessary to make an order for a private hearing.

(3) The consent order did not specifically deal with the issue of whether there should be an order preventing the disclosure of the identity of D and her minor child for the benefit of the child. This aspect of the application has been referred to me for good order. The claim raises issues concerning the health, welfare and upbringing of D’s child. It relies on evidence concerning these matters. D’s child has a reasonable expectation of privacy and rights pursuant to Art 8 ECHR which fall to be safeguarded. Knowledge of the identity of D will, in all the circumstances and given the evidence, allow D’s child to be identified. I take into account the strong public interest in open justice; nonetheless the reasons I have identified concerning the need to protect the interests of D’s child are compelling reasons for there to be a limited derogation from the open justice principle. For good order, I make an order accordingly.

(4) An order under CPR 5.4C(2) was made in the consent order (at para 3). I replicate it in my order so the relevant restrictions are all contained in a single order.

Signed: Marcus Pilgerstorfer KC, DHCJ
Date: 1 July 2026