The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's challenge to the High Court's refusal to anonymise proceedings and hold them in private, affirming the original court's order. The rulings at issue stemmed from judicial review proceedings initiated by the appellant in relation to the treatment of tax records and data-deletion requests, which had been conducted in public since their commencement. The appeal was refused primarily due to significant and unexplained delay by the appellant in seeking anonymisation and a private hearing—17 and 29 months after proceedings began—which the Court held disentitled him to the relief sought. The Court emphasised that the principle of open justice prevails unless compelling justification is shown at the outset, and the appellant's conduct, including the substantial delay and public nature of earlier related litigation, amounted to both waiver and acquiescence. No sufficient explanation for the delay was provided, and granting the orders at this late stage would serve no practical purpose.
anonymisation of proceedings – application for in camera hearing – delay in interlocutory relief – open justice principle – waiver and acquiescence – High Court order affirmed – judicial review – Data Protection Act 2018 – General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – RSC Ord. 84 r. 20(8)(a) – applicant conduct – public interest in administration of justice – taxpayer data – settlements with Revenue Commissioners – alternative remedy