[2025] UKUT 118 (AAC)

The appellant did not wish to remain anonymous and so we make no Rule 14 order with respect to his name. The rule 14 Order at the head of this decision was made to protect the privacy of others involved in the appeal. We are satisfied that they should not be identified in this decision, whether directly by name or indirectly. Having regard to the interests of justice, we were accordingly satisfied that it is proportionate for the rule 14 order to remain in force.

In addition, the DBS have asked us to use ciphers for the two people we may refer to who are not the appellant to avoid any jigsaw identification of them. We do this throughout the decision.