VCE -v- Gravesham Borough Council (anonymity order)
Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order
Case number: AC-2026-LON-003373
In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Administrative Court
In the matter of an application for judicial review
31 July 2026
Before:
The Hon. Mr Justice Choudhury
Between:
The King
on the application of
VCE
(Claimant)
-v-
Gravesham Borough Council
(Defendant)
Order
On an application by the Claimant for urgent interim relief and anonymity
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Defendant
ORDER BY THE HON. MR JUSTICE CHOUDHURY
- 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 Claimant’s name is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; and
(ii) the Claimant is to be referred to orally and in writing as [“VCE”].
(b) Pursuant to s. 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, there must be no publication of the identity of the Claimant or of any matter likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings.
(c) Pursuant to CPR 5.4C(4):
(i) the parties must within 7 days file a redacted copy of any statement of case filed, omitting the name, address and any other information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant;
(ii) if any statement of case subsequently filed includes information likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant, a redacted copy omitting that information must be filed at the same time;
(iii) unless the Court grants permission under CPR 5.4C(6), no non- party many obtain a copy of any unredacted statement of case.
(d) Any person wishing to vary or discharge this Order must make an application, served on each party.
- Application for Mandatory injunction:
(a) This is refused
- Abridgement of time and expedition:
(a) The Defendant’s Acknowledgement of Service (CPR 54.8) must be filed and served by 4pm on 10 August 2026.
(b) Any Reply from the Claimant (CPR 54.8A) must be filed and served by $pm on date 13 August 2026.
(c) The papers are to be referred to a judge or deputy judge as soon as possible thereafter.
REASONS
(1) Anonymity: The Claimant is a victim of domestic abuse from which she has fled. Her personal safety and that of her children would be at risk should information about her enter the public domain. In addition, the claim relies on personal medical information in respect of which the Claimant and her children have a reasonable expectation of privacy. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1 of the Order.
(2) Application for interim relief:
a. The Claimant seeks mandatory injunctive relief requiring the Defendant to provide alternative accommodation within 7 days. The threshold for the granting of such relief is a high one in that the Claimant must show that there is a strong prima facie case, as well as establishing the other requirements for injunctive relief.
b. I am not persuaded that there is strong prima facie case for the granting of relief.
c. The Claimant and her children are currently housed in a one-bedroom flat located on the third floor. Whilst it would appear that this accommodation would be unsuitable in the medium to longer term, it cannot be said to be unsuitable in the short term. The principal concern raised is as to its accessibility, the flat being located on the third floor with no lift access. However, the Claimant’s Housing Needs Assessment form did not identify any mobility issues on her part or specify any particular mobility problems with stairs or walking distance for her two children. Moreover, whilst the Claimant does now state (with supporting evidence) that she is often required to carry one or both of her children up the stairs, it appears that half the time, the younger one is able to walk up unaided. Thus, whilst the situation is far from desirable, the problems do not appear to be immediately insurmountable so as to render the property wholly unsuitable in the short term.
d. The other problems identified – location on a main road, absence of safe storage space for buggy, limited bedroom accommodation, distance from school and the effect on the family of living in temporary accommodation – are, sadly, not unusual in this context and do not establish a strong prima facie case of breach on the Defendant’s part. Indeed, it is evident that the Defendant has been able to suggest alternative accommodation albeit that could not be taken up. The Defendant has further confirmed in its recent response to the application for interim relief that it will continue to keep the suitability of the accommodation under review.
e. In these circumstances, the application for interim relief fails at the first hurdle.
(3) Abridgement of time/expedition:
a. There is a degree of urgency given the worsening health of the Claimant and her children and the apparent unsuitability of remaining in the present accommodation for any protracted period. Accordingly, the Defendant is required to lodge its Acknowledgement of Service and the Claimant her Reply within the timescales set out above in order that a Judge can determine promptly whether permission should be granted and/or any further steps are to be taken.
Signed: MR JUSTICE CHOUDHURY
Date: 31.7.26