Tamworth Borough Council v Cocking [2002] EWCA Civ 61 (24 January 2002)
The applicant was afforded a fair trial despite self-representation; the judge was entitled to grant the injunction under section 81(5) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990; any issue with the width of the injunction order does not affect the validity of the judgment or provide grounds for appeal.
- Citation
- [2002] EWCA Civ 61
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Tamworth Borough Council; Defendant/applicant: Byril Cocking
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 24 January 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
- Outcome
- Permission to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Nuisance, Injunctions, Right to Fair Trial, Self Representation, Scope of Injunctions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tamworth Borough Council
Claimant/respondent
Byril Cocking
Defendant/applicant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial was unfair due to lack of legal representation
- 2 Whether the judge erred in granting an injunction under section 81(5) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990
- 3 Whether the terms of the injunction were too wide
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant was afforded a fair trial despite self-representation; the judge was entitled to grant the injunction under section 81(5) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990; any issue with the width of the injunction order does not affect the validity of the judgment or provide grounds for appeal.
Court Disposition
Permission to appeal refused
Orders
- Permission to appeal refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment