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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2023-LON-003748

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

15 December 2023

Before:

The Honourable Mr Justice Murray

Between:

The King on the application of
TXA

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Order

On an application for urgent mandatory interim relief
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Murray

  1. The Defendant is directed to file and serve a response to the Claimant’s application identifying the grounds, if any, upon which the application is resisted and what order it invites the Court to make, and to do this by 4:00pm on Monday, 18 December 2023.
  2. The claim is then to be further considered on the papers by the Administrative Court urgent applications judge on the day following receipt of the Defendant’s response or, in any event, as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter, for further directions and a hearing if so directed by the judge.
  3. Each party has liberty to apply to vary this order on 24 hours’ notice to the other party.
  4. The Claimant’s application for anonymity is granted on an interim basis, for further consideration by the judge referred to in paragraph 2 of this order.

Reasons

  1. I am not sure when this application was filed with the ACO, but it has only just reached me as the Administrative Court urgent applications judge at the end of the day on Friday. I am not fully satisfied from the chronology that this could not have been filed at least a day sooner so that the Defendant could have been directed to respond to the application before the weekend. (I also note that no draft order was provided with the application, as required by para 17.4.3.4 of the Administrative Court JR Guide 2023.)
  2. In all the circumstances, at this point on Friday evening, I have a real and serious doubt that the court is in a position to grant a mandatory injunction that will be effective this evening. Even if it were just and convenient to grant a mandatory injunction this evening on the basis sought, it would only have been granted until it could be considered at an early hearing, listed on an urgent basis, and not (without the views of the Defendant) for the full period sought as set out in section 1 of the Form N463.
  3. It appears clear that the Claimant is a repeat victim of trafficking, is for that reason particularly vulnerable, and his recent other options for accommodation appear to have been exhausted. That much, at any rate, is asserted. This is clearly prima facie an urgent matter. This order, therefore, requires an urgent response from the Defendant.
  4. Given the background, it is necessary and appropriate to grant an anonymity order under CPR r 39.2(3) until the question of anonymity can be considered properly.