TXM -v- Hampshire County Council (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC-2023-LON-001923

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

28 June 2024


The Honourable Mr Justice Eyre


The King on the application of


Hampshire County Council


On an application by the Claimant for anonymity and by the Claimant’s solicitors for a declaration pursuant to CPR rule 42.3

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and his solicitors and by the Defendant

AND UPON it appearing that non-disclosure of the identity of the Claimant is necessary in order to secure the proper administration of justice pursuant to rule 39.2(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and rules 5.4C of the Civil Procedure Rules

ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Eyre

1. The Claimant’s application for anonymity is granted, and pursuant to CPR Rule 5.4A-5.4D and Rule 39.2, with effect from the date of this order and until further order:
(a) The Claimant shall hereinafter be referred to in these proceedings as “TXM” and there shall be substituted for all purposes of this case, in place of references to the name of the Claimant, reference to “TXM”;
(b) There shall be no publication of any name, address, picture or other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant as being the Claimant in these proceedings;
(c) In paragraph (b) “publication” means communication to the public or any section of the public whether by way of report of the proceedings or otherwise. It includes publication in a newspaper or broadcast, or on the internet, by any person;
(d) The Defendant, and any party served with or given notice of the anonymity order, has permission to apply to discharge or vary that order. Any application for that purpose must be made in writing, on notice to all parties;
(e) Pursuant to CPR rule 5.4C a person who is not a party to the proceedings may obtain a copy of a statement of case, judgment or order from the court records only if the statement of case, judgment or order has been anonymised such that: (i) the Claimant is referred to in those documents only as “TXM”; and (ii) any reference to the name of the Claimant be deleted from those documents
(f) Any application for permission to inspect or obtain a non-anonymised version of a document must be made on notice to the Claimant and in accordance with CPR r.5.4C(6).

2. It is declared that Irwin Mitchell LLP has ceased to act as solicitors for the Claimant in these proceedings.

3. The Claim shall be struck out unless by 31st July 2024 the Claimant has confirmed in writing to the court that he wishes the claim to continue to the stage of the consideration of the grant of permission.

4. If the Claimant does so confirm then the case shall be referred to a judge or deputy judge of the Administrative Court for further consideration.

5. Costs reserved.

This order has been made without a hearing. Any party affected by this order may apply within 7 days of the service of this order on that party to have it set aside, varied, or stayed.


1. With some reservation I am satisfied that anonymisation is necessary in light of the confidential nature of the information underlying the claim.

2. The application by the Claimant’s solicitors is meritorious in light of the matters set out in support their application.

3. I have considered whether to address permission at this stage. However, I am conscious that the last document sent to the court before the solicitors’ application was a request for the case not to be referred to a judge because the parties were in negotiation. It may be that the question of pursuit of the claim is now wholly academic in which case consideration of permission will be otiose. The matter cannot, however, be left in suspended animation indefinitely. My order gives the Claimant an opportunity to cause permission to be considered but if he does not do so then the claim is to be struck out.