National Highways Ltd v Persons unknown deliberately causing the blocking, slowing down, obstructing or otherwise interfering with the flow of traffic onto or off or along the strategic road network for the purpose of protesting and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Lavender |
| Judgment Date | 17 November 2021 |
| Neutral Citation | [2021] EWHC 3081 (QB) |
| Docket Number | Claim No: QB-2021-003977 |
| Year | 2021 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
[2021] EWHC 3081 (QB)
Mr Justice Lavender
Claim No: QB-2021-003977
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
The Law Courts
50 West Bar
Sheffield S3 8PH
Saira Kabir Sheikh QC and Charles Merrett (instructed by the Government Legal Department) for the Claimant
The following Defendants in Person: Dr Diana Lewen Warner (27 th), Jerrard Mark Latimer (44 th), Liam Norton (54 th), Michael Brown (67 th), Rob Stuart (83 rd), Stephen Gower (95 th), Tim Speers (105 th), Victoria Anne Lindsell (110 th) and Andria Efthimious-Mordaunt (123 rd)
Owen Greenhall (instructed by Hodge Jones Allen) for Jessica Branch and Caspar Hughes
Hearing date: 11 November 2021
(1) Introduction
The purpose of this judgment is to set out the reasons for the decision which I announced at the conclusion of the hearing in the Royal Courts of Justice on 11 November 2021, which was that I would not set aside the ex parte interim injunction made by Linden J on 25 October 2021.
In that hearing, I was also invited to vary Linden J's injunction, if I did not set it aside altogether, and, in some respects, it was conceded that I should do so. Insofar as there were disputed issues about the terms of Linden J's injunction, I decided those issues at the hearing for the reasons which I gave then, which I will not rehearse.
In effect, I varied Linden J's injunction, although the means by which I achieved that end was to discharge his order with effect from 11 November 2021 and to make a differently worded injunction in its place.
For the purposes of this judgment, it is only necessary to refer to paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 of the injunction which I made on 11 November 2021, which is in the following terms:
With immediate effect and until the earlier of (i) Trial; (ii) Further Order; or (iii) 23.59 pm on 31 December 2021, the Defendants and each of them are forbidden from deliberately undertaking the activities prohibited in paragraphs 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 below:
3.1 Blocking, slowing down, obstructing or otherwise interfering with the flow of traffic onto or along or off the SRN for the purpose of protesting.
3.2 Blocking, slowing down, obstructing or otherwise interfering with access to or from the SRN, including doing so by any activity on any adjacent slip roads or roundabouts which are not vested in the Claimant, for the purpose of protesting which has the effect of slowing down or otherwise interfering with the flow of traffic onto or along or off the SRN.
This injunction applies to the whole of the Strategic Road Network (“the SRN”), except those parts covered by the earlier injunctions which I will mention later.
(2) Background
(2)(b) The Insulate Britain Protests
There have in recent months been a number of well-publicised protests by individuals associated with a movement called “Insulate Britain”. I will call these the “Insulate Britain protests”. It is not suggested that Insulate Britain is either a legal entity or the sort of unincorporated association against which an order could properly be made. The first five Insulate Britain protests were on 13 September 2021, at various locations on the M25 motorway. By the date of the hearing, there had been many more Insulate Britain protests, including:
(1) five protests on the M25 on 15 September 2021;
(2) three protests on the M25 on 17 September 2021;
(3) protests on the M3 at Junction 1 and the M11 at Junction 8 on 17 September 2021;
(4) a protest on the M25 and one on the A1M at Junction 4 (Hatfield) on 20 September 2021;
(5) two protests on the M25 on 21 September 2021;
(6) a protest on the A20 near Dover on 24 September 2021;
(7) protests on the M25 on 27, 29 and 30 September 2021;
(8) protests on the M25 and on the M1 at Junction 1 (Brent Cross) and the M4 at Junction 3 (Heathrow Airport) on 1 October 2021;
(9) four protests on roads in London which are not part of the SRN on 4 October 2021;
(10) a protest on the M25 on 8 October 2021 (which is the subject of committal applications currently being heard by the Divisional Court);
(11) a protest on the M25 on 13 October 2021;
(12) protests on roads in London on 25 October 2021;
(13) protests on the M25 and, outside the SRN, on the A206 and the A40/4000 on 27 October 2021;
(14) two protests on the M25 on 29 October 2021;
(15) protests on the M25 and, outside the SRN, on the A538 (in Manchester) and the A4400 (in Birmingham) on 2 November 2021; and
(16) a protest in Parliament Square, London on 2 November 2021.
The protestors who appeared before me on 11 November 2021 and on earlier occasions made clear that it was their intention to continue protesting in this way and, indeed, that they considered themselves obliged to do so. That is consistent with press releases and statements by other protestors reported in the media.
The aims of the protestors are, in summary, to draw attention to what they consider to be failings in government policy in relation to the likely consequences of climate change resulting from global warming and to promote changes in that policy, notably the introduction of a new policy for insulating all homes in Britain.
The protestors block traffic on the road where they are protesting and continue to do so until they are removed. In addition to sitting on the road, they also glue themselves to the road or to police vehicles. The protests can last for several hours, with the longest of which I am aware having lasted for seven and a quarter hours. No warnings are given to allow drivers to choose a different route so as to avoid the protest.
The protestors are non-violent. They are usually removed by the police, but some drivers have taken it upon themselves to remove protestors or to drive slowly into them in an attempt to force them out of the way.
(2)(b) The Strategic Road Network and National Highways Limited
Many, but not all, of the Insulate Britain protests have taken place on motorways or other parts of the SRN, which consists of 4,300 miles of motorways and major A roads. The roads forming the SRN are illustrated on maps attached to Linden J's and my order and are more precisely identified in a 249-page list attached to those orders. The SRN is of considerable importance to the economy of this country. Individuals use it daily to get to work and for a host of other purposes. It carries 69% of lorry traffic in England. In 2016 it carried 126 billion vehicle miles. That is equivalent to an average of about 29 million vehicle miles per mile of road per year, or about 80,000 vehicle miles per mile of road per day.
The claimant, National Highways Limited (known until 8 September 2021 as Highways England Company Limited), was appointed as a strategic highways company and as the highway authority for the SRN pursuant to section 1 of the Infrastructure Act 2015 by the Appointment of a Strategic Highways Company Order 2015 (SI 2015/376). Title to the SRN was vested in National Highways pursuant to section 263 of the Highways Act 1980 and a Transfer Scheme made pursuant to section 15 of the Infrastructure Act 2015.
The claimant has, inter alia, the following duties:
(1) The claimant maintains the SRN pursuant to a licence dated 1 April 2015 which obliges it, inter alia, to seek to minimise disruption to road users which might reasonably be expected to occur as a result of unplanned disruption to the network.
(2) Section 5(2)(b) of the Infrastructure Act 2015 provides that the claimant must, in exercising its functions, have regard to the effect of the exercise of those functions on the safety of users of highways.
(3) Section 130 of the Highways Act 1980 provides that it is the duty of the highway authority to assert and protect the rights of the public to the use and enjoyment of any highway for which they are the highway authority.
(2)(c) The Injunctions
The claimant contends that the Institute Britain protests:
(1) constitute trespasses and nuisances;
(2) have caused widespread and serious disruption to road users, considerable economic damage, considerable public expense and anxiety, inconvenience and distress for road users; and
(3) create an immediate threat to the lives of the protestors and road users, including those reliant on the movement of emergency services vehicles.
The claimant has obtained four injunctions against “Persons unknown causing the blocking, slowing down, obstructing or otherwise interfering with the flow of traffic onto or off or along” relevant roads, as follows:
(1) On 21 September 2021 I granted an interim injunction which applied to the M25 motorway (“the M25 injunction”: claim number QB-2021-003576).
(2) On 24 September 2021 Cavanagh J granted an interim injunction which applied to the A2, A20, A2070, M2 and M20: claim number QB-2021-003626.
(3) On 2 October 2021 Holgate J granted an interim injunction covering various access roads to London: claim number QB-2021-003737.
(4) On 25 October 2021 Linden J made the injunction which on 11 November 2021 I effectively varied, but refused to set aside, and which applies to the whole of the SRN, except those roads covered by the first three injunctions.
It is relevant to note that Transport for London has also obtained two similar injunctions, covering various significant roads in London.
The only defendants to the M25 injunction were “Persons unknown”, but individual defendants have been named in subsequent injunctions, in part as a result of orders made against relevant chief constables requiring them to provide to the claimant the names of protestors who are arrested at Insulate Britain...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shell v Persons Unknown
...“publication”. 72 I therefore respectfully agree with the observation of Lavender J in National Highways Limited v Persons Unknown [2021] EWHC 3081 (QB) at [41] that section 12(3) is “not applicable” in this 73 It is, though, necessary to address the decisions in Ineos Upstream v Persons U......
-
Transport for London v Persons Unknown
...(KB) and [2023] EWHC 402 (KB) respectively. I also refer to the judgment of Lavender J in another NHL case dated 17 November 2021 [2021] EWHC 3081 (QB). In this judgment, I do not repeat all of the relevant factual and legal background; rather, where uncontroversial or where I agree, I cro......
-
Shell UK v Persons Unknown
...with the recognition of Ms Branch under CPR 40.9 in (i) National Highways Limited v Persons Unknown (blocking traffic) and others [2021] EWHC 3081 (QB) at [20]–[22], where Lavender J concluded that she was affected by the initial injunction although she had not taken part in the relevant p......
-
High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd v Four Categories of Persons Unknown
...protests by a group loosely known as ‘Insulate Britain’: see, in particular, National Highways Limited v Persons Unknown and others [2021] EWHC 3081 (QB) (Lavender J); National Highways Limited v Persons Unknown and others [2022] EWHC 1105 (QB) (Bennathan 54 I have the Revised HS2 Land Pl......