|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions >> London Borough of Redbridge v Stokes & Ors  EWHC 4076 (QB) (23 November 2018)
Cite as:  EWHC 4076 (QB)
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
B e f o r e :
| LONDON BOROUGH OF REDBRIDGE
|MARTIN STOKES AND 99 OTHER NAMED DEFENDANTS
AND PERSONS UNKNOWN FORMING OR INTENDING TO FORM UNAUTHORISED ENCAMPMENTS IN LONDON BOROUGH OF REDBRIDGE
Central Court, 25 Southampton Buildings, London WC2A 1AL
Tel: 0330 100 5223 | Email: firstname.lastname@example.org | auscript.com
THE DEFENDANTS did not appear and were not represented
23 NOVEMBER 2018
Crown Copyright ©
MRS JUSTICE FARBEY:
"(1) First, that the description of the defendant should not involve a legal conclusion, such as is implicit in the use of the word 'trespass'.
(2) Secondly, that it is undesirable to use a description such as 'intending to trespass', because that depends on the subjective intention of the individual which is not necessarily known to the outside world, and in particular the claimant, and is susceptible of change."
"Where a local authority considers it expedient for the promotion of the interests of the inhabitants of their area –
(a) They may prosecute or defend or appear in any legal proceedings and, in the case of civil proceedings, may institute them in their own name…".
"16. The submission made by the claimants is that, in these circumstances, it is expedient to grant a district wide injunction. Harlow District is small; it is some 11.69 square miles. A plan before the court showing the previous encampments illustrates them scattered across the district.
17. It is, of course, a matter of fact and degree as to whether a district wide order, as is sought, is proportionate. I have no doubt, as a result of the circumstances which I have set out, that the order sought is both necessary and proportionate. First, there has been a clear breach of planning control for some 17 months and it is reasonable to apprehend further breaches should no further action be taken. Second, persistent efforts by the public authorities to deal with the problem by other means have failed. Third, the approach of the local authority hitherto has been expensive to the public purse, both in terms of money, but more significantly in terms of time spent without any visible change to the behaviour on behalf of the defendants. Third, the consequences of the unlawful behaviour and breach of planning control are not conducive to the best interest of the other law abiding residents within the district.
18. It is clear from the evidence before the court that there are no children with particular needs, nor any other circumstances on behalf of the defendants that could outweigh the necessity for the order which is sought. As I have indicated, in my judgment the order sought is both necessary and proportionate."
We hereby certify that the above is an accurate and complete record of the proceedings or part thereof.