England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
KING'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
SITTING IN LEEDS

		Circulated: Monday, 25th March 2024
		26th March 2024

MR JUSTICE FORDHAM:

1. This is a judicial determination on the papers, but where it is, in my judgment, appropriate to give reasons by way of a short judgment. The claim for judicial review is dated 8 January 2024 and was filed in London. The Claimant lives in Pontefract (WF7). The targets for judicial review are decisions of the Leeds District Magistrates' Court taken on 4 October 2023 including as to a bail condition and the entry of a plea. Claims are made about entitlements to free representation and translated documents. I am not considering the viability of the legal merits of the claim.
2. The N461 gave these reasons for filing the claim other than in the region with which the claim is most closely connected.

There is an ongoing complaint that I have made against the judiciary and clerical staff at the district registry of the High Court in Leeds and there is an ongoing complaint against the Leeds Combined Court Centre; therefore, in order to avoid bias, conflict of interest, and to ensure that my claim is adjudicated by "an impartial tribunal", this claim must be dealt with outside of West and East Yorkshire — that is, at the Administrative Court in London.

3. The Administrative Court Lawyer who made the 'minded-to transfer' order (12 January 2024) recorded that "checks with the Court reveals that no such complaint exists". In response, the Claimant provided details, including email dates and times (28.4.23 at 0750 and 1.12.23 at 1241) and a complaint number (C-21100006). The Administrative Court Lawyer in Leeds has checked the Leeds inboxes for the dates and times, and the OPTIC system (where all complaints relating to all jurisdictions that operate from the Leeds Combined Courts building) and the complaints described have not been located. The Claimant has been asked by the Court (on 8.3.24 and 15.3.24) to provide copies of the emails and of the complaint C-21100006. A deadline (4pm on 19.3.24), given at my direction by the Senior Caseworker, has come and gone. I do not have them. But I have been able to see the Claimant's description of them. I do not need to form a view on whether the complaints have been made. I can appropriately proceed on the basis that any complaint which has been made will be addressed on its merits. I am satisfied that it is appropriate, consistently with the overriding objective, to make a ruling.
4. Having read and considered what the Claimant has said in his representations and communications with the Court, I can see no basis for any conclusion or objectively justified perception that no judge or judges who sit in the Administrative Court at Leeds could deal properly, justly and appropriately with the claim for judicial review; nor can I see anything which would undermine the Administrative Court in Leeds dealing with the claim properly and appropriately. If a judge of the Court has dealt with a previous case involving the Claimant, and if this is considered to give rise to a problem or concern, that can be considered. If any decision on any complaint is said to have any specific consequence, the Claimant can raise this. The Administrative Court in Leeds has a team of judges, including visiting High Court and Deputy High Court judges. It matters that judicial review claims are dealt with by the regional venue with which they are most closely related, absent some very good reason. There is no reason why this claim should be dealt with by the regional venue for the south-east of England. I will transfer the case to the Administrative Court in Leeds where it belongs.

Circulated: 25.3.24

Hand-down: 26.3.24