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

Administrative CourtHigh CourtKing's Bench DivisionAnonymity Order

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

11 March 2026

Before:

His Honour Judge Rawlings

Between:

THE KING on the application of
ZAN

-v-

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Order

On an application by the Claimant for anonymity for the Claimant and expedition of the permission stage

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant

ORDER BY HIS HONOUR JUDGE RAWLINGS

  1. 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 ZAN.
    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.
  2. Abridgement of time and expedition:
    The papers are to be referred to a judge within 7 days of the Claimant filing his Reply or confirming in writing that he will not file a Reply.

REASONS

  1. Anonymity: The Claimant claims to have been trafficked and abused, including sexual abuse and seeks relief in the form of an order requiring the Defendant to pay for private mental health services. The public interest in knowing the identity of the Claimant is outweighed by the potential damage that may be caused to the Claimant’s mental health were his identity to be publicly disclosed. There are accordingly compelling reasons for the limited derogations from the principle of open justice in paragraph 1.
  2. Abridgement of time/expedition: The potential risk to the Claimant’s mental health of his condition continuing to go untreated appears sufficient to justify directing that permission be considered within 7 days of Reply