W -v- London Borough of Lambeth (anonymity order)

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Claim number: CO/3508/2022

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

28 February 2023

Before:

Mrs Justice Lang

Between:

The King on the application of
W

-v-

London Borough of Lambeth

Interested parties:

Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities

Secretary of State for Education

Order

On the Claimant’s application for anonymity, permission to apply for judicial review, an extension of time, and interim relief;
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the parties
Order by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE

  1. Pursuant to CPR r.39.2, in any report of these proceedings, there shall be no publication of the name and address of the Claimant, nor any other particulars likely to lead to their identification. In the proceedings, the Claimant shall be anonymised and referred to as “W”.
  2. The applications for permission to apply for judicial review, an extension of time, and interim relief are to be listed for an oral hearing on a date to be fixed, before the end of March 2023, having regard to the availability of counsel. Time estimate: 2 hours.
  3. The Claimant must file and serve an agreed bundle of authorities and statutory materials, not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing. The electronic version of the bundle shall be prepared by the Claimant in accordance with the Guidance on the Administrative Court website. The Claimant must also lodge a hard-copy version of the authorities bundle at the Administrative Court Office, not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing.
  4. The Defendant must file and serve a witness statement explaining the Claimant’s current housing position, not less than 7 days before the date of the hearing.
  5. Liberty to apply on 2 days notice to the other party.
  6. Costs in the case.

Reasons

The Claimant seeks an urgent oral hearing in March for interim relief as she is threatened with eviction and homelessness. In the light of this, the Defendant’s housing officer has asked her to make a homelessness application, and has assured her that, if eviction does take place, she will be provided with temporary accommodation, pending a full housing assessment. Therefore the immediate risk of homelessness appears to have been averted, but her housing remains precarious.
The principles governing the grant of interim relief in judicial review proceedings are those contained in American Cyanamid Company v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396, modified as appropriate to public law cases. First, the Claimant must demonstrate that there is a serious question to be tried. In judicial review claims, this involves considering not merely whether the claim is arguable but also whether there is a real prospect of the claim succeeding at the substantive hearing: see R (Medical Justice) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 1425 (Admin), per Cranston J at [6] and The Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2022, paragraph 16.6.1. Secondly, the Court should consider whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting or refusing the interlocutory relief that is sought.
My preliminary view is that the Claimant faces an uphill struggle in reaching the threshold for the grant of permission and interim relief on any of the grounds, and in obtaining an extension of time on both limbs of ground 1, which concerns events as long ago as December 2020.
Therefore, I consider that, in furtherance of the overriding objective, all these issues should be considered at a single hearing, to be listed before the end of March 2023.

Anonymity

Although the Claimant is now 19 years old, the history to this claim includes issues of family breakdown and the involvement of the Defendant whilst she was a minor. It would be potentially damaging for these details to be in the public domain without her identity being protected, and this outweighs the open justice principle in this case.