Susan Evans and XX -v- Care Quality Commission (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtCivilHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: AC-2024-LON-00114

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

In the matter of an application for judicial review

8 November 2024

Before:

The Honourable Mr Justice Foxton

Between:

The King
on the application of
(1) Susan Evans
(2) XX
(Claimants)

-v-

Care Quality Commission
(Defendant)

and

(1) Gender Plus Healthcare Limited
(2) Secretary of State for Health and Social Care
(3) National Health Service Commissioning Board
(4) YY
(5) ZZ
(Interested Parties)

Order

Notification of the Judge’s decision on the application for permission to apply for judicial review (CPR 54.11, 54.12)

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Acknowledgements of service filed by the Defendant and Interested Parties.

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Foxton

  1. The Second Claimant shall be referred to for all purposes in these proceedings as XX, the Second Claimant’s daughter as YY and the Second Claimant’s ex-husband as ZZ.

  2. Until further order, the publication of these proceedings in the name of XX, YY or ZZ or of any information liable to lead to their identification in connection with these proceedings is prohibited.

  3. The Claimant’s application for an extension of time to respond to the Defendant’s Acknowledgment of Service of 3 May 2024 is granted.

  4. The Claimant shall be permitted to rely upon the expert report of Professor Paul Hruz.

  5. The application for permission to apply for judicial review is granted.

  6. The application is to be listed for 1.5 days; the parties to provide a written time estimate within 7 days of service of this order if they disagree with this direction.

  7. Within 14 days the Claimant shall file up-to-date evidence addressing the matters in paragraph 9.9.2 of the Administrative Court Guide, and the terms of any proposed CCO (including as to amount).

  8. Within 14 days of the receipt of that evidence, the Defendant will confirm whether it consents or opposes the CCO sought. If the order is opposed the Claimants must issue an application for a CCO.

Observations

  1. Anonymisation and reporting restrictions are appropriate pursuant to CPR 39.2 and s.30 of the CYPA 1933 against the background on the ongoing appeal in the Family Court proceedings and given YY’s age.
  1. While expert evidence is unusual in judicial review proceedings, I am not able to rule out the possibility of Professor Hruz’s report proving of assistance to the court. Aspects of the case have technical subject
    where expert medical evidence may assist.

  2. I am satisfied that both grounds are arguable, in particular the issue of whether there was sufficient evidential basis for the decision and the rationality of the Defendant’s decision.

  3. In this case, there have been events of potential significance since the Claimants’ application for judicial review was issued and the Defendant’s Summary Grounds served. The letter from Sinclairs Law of 5 November 2024 relies on a number of such events: the letter sent by NHS England on 9 April 2024, the interim report of Dr Penny Dash of 26 July 2024, the NHS response to its consultation on 7 August 2024 and the publication of the Final Report of Dr Penny Dash on 15 October 204. It is apparent that the Claimants wishes to rely upon this material, and they also suggested that significant documents and information were disclosed by the Defendant for the first time with its Acknowledgement of Service. In these circumstances, the Claimant should be given an opportunity to serve Amended Grounds (if so advised), to which the Defendant may either object or (to the extent that there is no objection) serve Amended Summary Grounds of Defence.

  4. The Defendant has not opposed a CCO in principle. However, significant time has elapsed since the original order was sought, such that further information is required before the Court can fix the amount of the cap. I have made directions for this.

Case management directions

  1. Within 7 days, the Claimants shall notify the Defendant whether they seek to amend their Statement of Facts and Grounds to reflect any matters which have occurred since the Statement of Facts and Grounds were served.

  2. If the Claimants wish to make any amendments, then the proposed amendments must be served within 14 days of the notification in paragraph 1 above. The Defendant will then have 14 days to notify the Claimants whether any of the proposed amendments are objected to. To the extent that they are, the Claimants will need to seek permission to amend.

  3. Within 28 days of (a) the date of notification in paragraph 1 above if no amendments are sought to be made;; or (b) of the date of service of Amended Grounds to the extent that the amendments are not opposed, the Defendant and any other person served with the Claim Form who wishes to contest the claim or support it on additional grounds shall file and serve (a) Detailed Grounds for contesting the claim or supporting it on additional grounds, and (b) any written evidence that is to be relied on. For the avoidance of doubt, a party who has filed and served Summary Grounds pursuant to CPR 54.8 may comply with (a) above by filing and serving a document which states that those Summary Grounds, or those Summary Grounds as amended, shall stand as the Detailed Grounds required by CPR 54.14.

  4. Any application by the Claimant to serve evidence in reply shall be filed and served within 21 days of the date on which the Defendant serves evidence pursuant to 3(b) above.

  5. The parties shall agree the contents of the hearing bundle and must file it with the Court not less than 4 weeks before the date of the hearing of the judicial review. An electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared and lodged in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The parties shall, if requested by the Court lodge 2 hard-copy versions of the hearing bundle.

  6. The Claimant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 21 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.

  7. The Defendant and any Interested Party must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 14 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.

  8. The parties shall agree the contents of a bundle containing the authorities to be referred to at the hearing. An electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The parties shall if requested by the Court, prepare a hard-copy version of the authorities bundle. The electronic version of the bundle and if requested, the hard copy version of the bundle, shall be lodged with the Court not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.

Signed Mr Justice Foxton
Date: 08/11/2024