UO -v- London Borough of Redbridge (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: AC -2023-LON-003147

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

29 November 2023

Before:

Anneli Howard KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge)

Between:

The King on the application of
UO

-v-

London Borough of Redbridge

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 Acknowledgement(s) of service and Summary Grounds of Resistance (“SGRs”) filed by the Defendant on 13 November 2024

Upon reading the Application Notices and accompanying documents and evidence, including the Amended Statement of Facts and Grounds (“ASOFG”) and Reply filed by the Claimant on 14 and 16 November 2023 and the responses filed by the Defendant to both applications and subsequent correspondence between the parties

ORDER by Anneli Howard KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge)

Anonymity

  1. The Claimant’s application for anonymity is granted and neither the names of the Claimant nor her children shall be referred to.
  2. Pursuant to CPR r.39(2)(4), there shall not be disclosed in any report of the proceedings the name of her the claimant and her children or any details leading to their identification. There shall be be substituted for all purposes in this claim, in place of reference to the Claimant and her children by name, and whether orally or in writing, referenced to the letters “UO”, “LO”, “JO” and “AO” respectively.
  3. The Court file is to be retained by the Court and marked “Anonymized”. Pursuant to CPR 5.4C, person who is not a party to these proceedings may obtain a copy of the pleadings, a Judgment or Order from the court records only if the pleadings, Judgement or Order has been anonymised such that the Claimant and her children are referred to as “UO” LO”, “JO” and “AO” respectively in those documents and any address has been removed.
  4. Reporting restrictions apply as to the disclosing of any information that may lead to the subsequent identity creation of the Claimant and her children. In particular, disclosure of the Claimant and her children’s names or address is prohibited.

Amendment to pleadings and evidence

  1. The Claimant is given permission pursuant to CPR Part 23 to amend her statement of case, and rely on the new matters as set out in the ASOFG and accompanying application.
  2. The Claimant is granted permission to rely upon her witness statement and the accompanying documents.

Reply

7. The Claimant is given permission to rely upon her Reply to the SGRs and the accompanying evidence. The clarifications provided regarding the new Policy are constructive and the length of the document is not excessive or disproportionate.

Permission

8. The application for permission to apply for judicial review is granted. The Claimant’s case meets the arguability threshold. The issues raised regarding the housing needs assessment and personal housing plan under s.189 of the Housing Act 1996 raise fresh issues to the ongoing s.202 review of suitability of her existing accommodation and are not academic. It is now common ground between the parties that the proceedings do not involve a challenge to the suitability of the current accommodation or seek any remedy in that regard so there is no risk of a “rolling” or “evolving” claim.

Expedition

9. The application for expedition of the hearing of the claim is refused. The Claimant has not provided sufficient evidence or reasons why this case should be accelerated over other competing claims, which carry greater urgency.

Case Management Directions

  1. The Defendant shall, within 35 days of the date of service of this Order, 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 shall stand as the Detailed Grounds required by CPR 54.14.
  2. 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 10(b) above.
  3. The claim shall be listed for hearing as soon as the court can reasonably accommodate the hearing, with a time estimate of 1 day. If the parties disagree with this time estimate they shall provide a written time estimate within 7 days of service of this order.
  4. The parties shall agree the contents of the hearing bundle and must file it with the Court not less than 3 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.
  5. The Claimant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 21 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
  6. The Defendant must file and serve a Skeleton Argument not less than 14 days before the date of the hearing of the judicial review.
  7. 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.

Liberty to Apply

17. Anyone wishing to vary or discharge this Order may make an application to the Court, served on each party.