Wolverhampton City Council and Others v Persons Unknown and Others

Hearing date: 27 February 2024

Approved Judgment

This judgment was handed down remotely at 10:30 on 3 September 2024 by circulation to the parties or their representatives by e-mail and by release to the National Archives.

Introduction

On 27 February 2024 I granted injunctions on the application of the Claimants (Cs) in the two cases captioned above, made pursuant to s 222, Local Government Act 1972, and s 130, Highways Act 1980 (amongst other provisions), and I made other ancillary orders, including powers of arrest under s 27(3), Police and Justice Act 2006, and an order joining the Ninth Defendant in KB-2022-BHM-000188 (the Wolverhampton et al case).

Save in one respect, none of the Defendants (Ds) appeared, and neither the Court, nor Cs, had received any notification that any other person wished to be joined as a party or to be heard. The one exception was D2, in KB-2022-BHM-000221 (the Birmingham case), who attended in order to give an appropriate undertaking, which I accepted.

I granted the injunctions to restrain what is euphemistically known as ‘car cruising’. I will say more about what this is in a moment.

These proceedings began in December 2022 under CPR Part 8. Hill J granted interim injunctions and powers of arrest on an urgent basis in orders sealed on 22 December 2022. Her judgment is reported at [2023] EWHC 56 (KB).

Freedman J continued the injunctions following a review hearing on 13 February 2023: see [2023] EWHC 722 (KB).

Since then, there have been further review hearings at which the injunctions have been continued and amended, as well as other hearings. There have also been committal proceedings for breaches of the injunction.

A substantial quantity of evidence was filed for the hearing. However, in the circumstances, it is not necessary to set out the detail of this. I read the necessary material in advance of the hearing and I heard from several of Cs' witnesses at the hearing, who largely adopted their statements. The evidence was not disputed.

In short, I was wholly satisfied at the end of the hearing that it was appropriate to make the orders sought by Cs. These are my reasons.

The conduct to be restrained

‘Car cruising’, or ‘street cruising’, was described by Bean LJ in Sharif v Birmingham City Council[2020] EWCA Civ 1488, [1], as referring to a ‘… form of anti-social behaviour which has apparently become a widespread problem in the West Midlands in particular.’ That said, other areas of the country have also been affected by similar behaviour. In [3] he said:

“Street cruising is not a statutory term. It was defined in a schedule to Judge Worster's order as follows:-

‘Street-Cruise’

1. “Street-Cruise” means a congregation of the drivers of 2 or more motor-vehicles (including motor-cycles) on the public highway or at any place to which the public have access within the Claimant's local government area (known as the City of Birmingham) as shown delineated in blue on the map at Schedule 1, at which any person, whether or not a driver or rider, performs any of the activities set out at para.2 below, so as, by such conduct, to cause any of the following:

(i) excessive noise;

(ii) danger to other road users (including pedestrians);

(iii) damage or the risk of damage to private property;

(iv) litter;

(v) any nuisance to another person not participating in the street-cruise.

2. The activities referred to at para.1, above, are:

(i) driving or riding at excessive speed, or otherwise dangerously;

(ii) driving or riding in convoy;

(iii) racing against other motor-vehicles;

(iv) performing stunts in or on motor-vehicles;

(v) sounding horns or playing radios;

(vi) dropping litter;

(vii) supplying or using illegal drugs;

(viii) urinating in public;

(ix) shouting or swearing at, or abusing, threatening or otherwise intimidating another person;

(x) obstruction of any other road-user.

‘Participating in a Street-Cruise’

3. A person participates in a street-cruise whether or not he is the driver or rider of, or passenger in or on, a motor-vehicle, if he is present and performs or encourages any other person to perform any activity to which paras. 1–2 above apply, and the term “participating in a street-cruise” shall be interpreted accordingly.’

In her judgment in the present case at [5], Hill J described the behaviour in question thus:

“5. … it involves … gatherings of two or more people where some of those present engage in motor racing, motor stunts or other dangerous or obstructive driving. Street cruises also attract participants who, whether or not they are taking part in the driving or riding, support or encourage others to do so, play loud music, rev their engines, show off their own cars, and engage in other similar antisocial activities. These activities are highly dangerous, having caused serious injury and, in some cases, fatalities. The activities taking place at these cruises are frequently unlawful.”

Paragraphs 2(2) and 2(4) of Cs' Particulars of Claim (PoC) in the Wolverhampton et al case (Version 5, dated 29 January 2024) define ‘car cruising’ and ‘stunts’ as follows:

“(2) ‘Car Cruising’ organised or impromptu events at which drivers of cars race, perform driving stunts, drive dangerously and drive in convoy. Such activities may be noisy, dangerous and illegal, obstructing highways and the premises bordering them, damaging property and putting the safety of spectators and other persons at risk.

…

(4) ‘Stunts’ Driving manoeuvres often undertaken as part of car cruising including:

(a) ‘Burnouts’ Causing a vehicle to destroy its tyres by applying power to the drive wheels while braking so as to remain in place while the wheels revolve at speed.

(b) ‘Donuts/Donutting’ Causing a vehicle to rotate around a fixed point (normally the front axle) while not moving-off causing noise, smoke and tyre marks to be created.

(c) ‘Drifting’ Turning by placing the vehicle in a skid so that most sideways motion is due to the skid not any significant steering input.

(d) ‘Undertaking’ passing a vehicle on its nearside so as to overtake in circumstances not permitted by the Highway Code.”

As I remarked at the hearing, so-called car cruising is often, in reality, organised dangerous driving. Although sometimes the gatherings in question occur impromptu, they are often organised in advance via social media and in other ways.

The present applications have been brought by local authorities whose areas, and whose residents, have been particularly affected by this sort of behaviour. The evidence graphically illustrates the real misery it causes in terms of noise, pollution and danger.

In preparing this judgment (and in preparing for the hearing) I (have) carefully considered the judgments of Hill J and Freedman J in particular. Parts of this judgment have been...