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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

Case number: CO/693/2023

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


Deputy High Court Judge Clare Padley


The King on the application of


Secretary of State for the Home Department


Notice of RENEWAL of claim for permission to apply for Judicial Review (C P R 54. 12)

  1. This notice must be lodged in the Administrative Court Office, by post or in person and be served upon the defendant (and interested parties who were served with the claim form) within 7 days of the service on the claimant or his solicitor of the notice that the claim for permission has been refused.
  2. If the claim was issued on or after 7 October 2013, a fee is payable on submission of Form 86B. Failure to pay the fee or lodge a certified Application for Fee remission may result in the claim being struck out. The form for Application for Remission of a Fee is obtainable from the Justice website http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/HMCTS/FormFinder.do
  3. If this form has not been lodged within 7 days of service (para 1 above) please set out below the reasons for delay:
  4. Set out below the grounds for seeking reconsideration

Notification of the Judge’s decision on the application for permission to apply for judicial review and in relation to anonymity (CPR 54.11, 54.12)
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Acknowledgement of Service filed by the Defendant
ORDER by Deputy High Court Judge Clare Padley

  1. The Claimant shall be referred to in these proceedings as “WHX”, and pursuant to CPR 39.2 there shall be no publication of the name or address of the Claimant or any particulars of the case likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant or his family without the leave of the court.
  2. Pursuant to CPR Rule 5.4C:
    (a) A person who is not a party to the proceedings may obtain a copy of a claim form, judgment or order from the court records only if the same has been anonymised and redacted in accordance with paragraph 1 of this order
    (b) if a person who is not a party to the proceedings applies for permission to obtain a copy of any other document or communication, such application shall be on at least 7 days’ written notice to the Claimant’s solicitors;
  3. Any person has liberty on three days’ written notice to the parties to apply to vary or discharge this order.
  4. The application for permission to apply for judicial review is refused
  5. The claim for damages is transferred to the Central London County Court.
  6. Cost submissions with respect to the judicial review claim are to be filed and served by each party within 14 days of the date of this sealed order.


  1. The Claimant is an asylum seeker from Pakistan who arrived in the UK with his family in May 2022. They were provided with temporary accommodation in June 2022. The Claimant sought permission to challenge the ongoing failure of the Defendant to comply with her duty under s 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 to provide him and his wife and their two children with adequate accommodation within a reasonable period of time. The Claimant also sought an application for interim relief.
  2. Following the issue of this claim, the Defendant has now provided the Claimant with suitable alternative accommodation and the Claimant has withdrawn his application for interim relief.
  3. The parties now agree that this claim is academic and that the remaining claim for damages can be properly transferred to the County Court. In those circumstances, I understand that it is also accepted by the parties, and I agree, that permission should be refused as no consent order withdrawing the claim has been provided.
  4. The parties are not in agreement about the costs and have agreed that this matter should be addressed by way of written submissions.
  5. No application for an anonymity order has been made but the Claimant is an asylum seeker and has two children who are referred to in the documentation. I consider that non-disclosure of the Claimant’s identity is necessary to protect his and their interests and for the proper administration of justice. I have therefore made an anonymity order of the court’s own motion, with provision for liberty to apply.