Queen Mary University of London v LSY & Ors

Queen Mary University of London v LSY & Ors

The University is entitled to a possession order as the protesters are trespassers, any licence or permission was withdrawn, and there is no real prospect of a defence based on property law, public law, or ECHR rights. The University's decisions were reasonable, proportionate, and prescribed by law. The making of a possession order does not amount to an unjustified or unlawful interference with the protesters' ECHR rights. There is no compelling reason for a trial.

Parties
Claimant: Queen Mary University of London; 1st Defendant: LSY; 2nd Defendant: MBC; 3rd Defendant: Persons Unknown (in occupation of Queen Mary University of London); 4th Defendant: FDE; 5th Defendant: JST
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Possession Proceedings (cpr Part 55) / Summary Judgment After Adjourned Hearing
Outcome
Possession order granted
Legal Topics
Possession of Land, Trespass, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Assembly, University Governance, Discrimination, Summary Judgment, Protest Rights
Property Law Public Law Human Rights Law Education Law Possession of Land Trespass Freedom of Expression Freedom of Assembly +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Queen Mary University of London

Claimant

LSY

1st Defendant

MBC

2nd Defendant

Persons Unknown (in occupation of Queen Mary University of London)

3rd Defendant

FDE

4th Defendant

JST

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Possession Proceedings (cpr Part 55) / Summary Judgment After Adjourned Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the University is entitled to a possession order against protesters occupying its land
  2. 2 Whether the protesters have a real prospect of defending the claim based on property law, public law, or ECHR rights
  3. 3 Whether the University's decisions were unlawful as a matter of public law or for breach of ECHR rights

Ratio Decidendi

The University is entitled to a possession order as the protesters are trespassers, any licence or permission was withdrawn, and there is no real prospect of a defence based on property law, public law, or ECHR rights. The University's decisions were reasonable, proportionate, and prescribed by law. The making of a possession order does not amount to an unjustified or unlawful interference with the protesters' ECHR rights. There is no compelling reason for a trial.

Court Disposition

Possession order granted

Orders

  • Possession of the Mile End campus (excluding leasehold areas) to the University forthwith
  • Anonymity orders continued for 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th Defendants