London Borough of Lambeth v Grant & Ors (trespass - statutory common land - possession - judicial independence) [2021] EWHC 1857 (QB) (05 July 2021)

London Borough of Lambeth v Grant & Ors (trespass - statutory common land - possession - judicial independence) [2021] EWHC 1857 (QB) (05 July 2021)

No final decision on possession or eviction was made. The case was adjourned to allow the Defendants to file formal witness statements, as the fact-specific proportionality assessment required by Ziegler could not be satisfied on the informal evidence presented. The court must ensure a fair procedure under Article 6 ECHR, especially where Articles 10 and 11 are engaged.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 1857 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: The London Borough of Lambeth; First Defendant: Caul Grant; Second Defendant: Kaylee; Third Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Possession Claim (trespass) / Interlocutory (adjourned for Further Evidence)
Outcome
Adjourned for further evidence; no final order for possession or eviction made.
Legal Topics
Trespass, Possession Proceedings, Protest Rights, Article 6 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR, Article 11 ECHR, Judicial Independence
Civil Procedure Human Rights Property Law Trespass Possession Proceedings Protest Rights Article 6 ECHR Article 10 ECHR +2 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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The London Borough of Lambeth

Claimant

Caul Grant

First Defendant

Kaylee

Second Defendant

Persons Unknown

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Possession Claim (trespass) / Interlocutory (adjourned for Further Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants' occupation of Clapham Common constitutes trespass after exceeding permitted use
  2. 2 Whether eviction would be a proportionate interference with Article 10 and 11 ECHR rights
  3. 3 Whether the court's procedure satisfies Article 6 ECHR fair hearing requirements

Ratio Decidendi

No final decision on possession or eviction was made. The case was adjourned to allow the Defendants to file formal witness statements, as the fact-specific proportionality assessment required by Ziegler could not be satisfied on the informal evidence presented. The court must ensure a fair procedure under Article 6 ECHR, especially where Articles 10 and 11 are engaged.

Court Disposition

Adjourned for further evidence; no final order for possession or eviction made.

Orders

  • Defendants to file formal witness statements addressing both their case and proposals to address Claimants' concerns about land use.
  • Timetable set for exchange of evidence before resumed hearing.