Sheffield City Council v Fairhall & Ors (Rev 1) [2017] EWHC 2121 (QB) (15 August 2017)

Sheffield City Council v Fairhall & Ors (Rev 1) [2017] EWHC 2121 (QB) (15 August 2017)

The council's decision to remove trees as part of highway maintenance is lawful under its statutory powers. The protestors' direct action in entering or remaining in safety zones constitutes trespass and is not a reasonable use of the highway. The conduct is not protected by Articles 10 and 11 ECHR as the restriction is prescribed by law, necessary, and proportionate. The council is entitled to an injunction restraining such conduct.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2121
Parties
Claimant: Sheffield City Council; Defendant: Alice Fairhall; Defendant: Simon Crump; Defendant: Alison Teal; Defendant: David Dillner; Defendant: Calvin Payne; Defendant: Paul Brooke; Defendant: Graham Turnbull; Defendant: Robin Ridley; Defendant: Persons Unknown being persons intending to enter or remain in safety zones erected on public highways in the City of Sheffield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim (injunction) / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Injunction granted against the fourth, fifth, and sixth defendants and persons unknown; claim for injunction not pursued against other named defendants due to undertakings.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Trespass, Highway Law, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Assembly, Statutory Powers and Duties, Protest Law
Public Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Local Government Law Injunctions Trespass Highway Law Freedom of Expression +3 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheffield City Council

Claimant

Alice Fairhall

Defendant

Simon Crump

Defendant

Alison Teal

Defendant

David Dillner

Defendant

Calvin Payne

Defendant

Paul Brooke

Defendant

Graham Turnbull

Defendant

Robin Ridley

Defendant

Persons Unknown being persons intending to enter or remain in safety zones erected on public highways in the City of Sheffield

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim (injunction) / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the council is entitled to an injunction restraining protestors from entering or remaining in safety zones around trees to be felled on public highways
  2. 2 Whether the protestors' conduct constitutes trespass or is protected as peaceful protest under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the council's tree felling decisions are lawful exercises of statutory powers under the Highways Act 1980

Ratio Decidendi

The council's decision to remove trees as part of highway maintenance is lawful under its statutory powers. The protestors' direct action in entering or remaining in safety zones constitutes trespass and is not a reasonable use of the highway. The conduct is not protected by Articles 10 and 11 ECHR as the restriction is prescribed by law, necessary, and proportionate. The council is entitled to an injunction restraining such conduct.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted against the fourth, fifth, and sixth defendants and persons unknown; claim for injunction not pursued against other named defendants due to undertakings.

Orders

  • Defendants Alison Teal, David Dillner, Calvin Payne, and persons unknown are restrained from entering or remaining in safety zones erected on public highways in Sheffield for tree felling purposes.
  • Other named defendants are bound by undertakings accepted by the council.