Sheffield City Council v Fairhall & Ors (Rev 1)

Sheffield City Council v Fairhall & Ors (Rev 1)

The council's decision to remove trees as part of highway maintenance is lawful and within its statutory powers. The direct action by the defendants constitutes trespass and a criminal offence under section 303 of the Highways Act 1980. Although Articles 10 and 11 ECHR are engaged, the restriction imposed by the injunction is justified and proportionate given the council's democratic mandate, the disruption caused, and the availability of alternative means of protest.

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
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Expedited Trial
Outcome
Injunction granted
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Trespass, Highway Maintenance, Peaceful Protest, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Assembly, Statutory Powers of Local Authorities
Public Law Local Government Law Tort Law Human Rights Law Injunctions Trespass Highway Maintenance Peaceful Protest +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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
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

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Expedited Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the council is entitled to an injunction restraining direct action preventing tree felling in Sheffield
  2. 2 Whether the direct action constitutes trespass or is protected as peaceful protest under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the council's tree felling programme is lawful under its statutory powers and duties

Ratio Decidendi

The council's decision to remove trees as part of highway maintenance is lawful and within its statutory powers. The direct action by the defendants constitutes trespass and a criminal offence under section 303 of the Highways Act 1980. Although Articles 10 and 11 ECHR are engaged, the restriction imposed by the injunction is justified and proportionate given the council's democratic mandate, the disruption caused, and the availability of alternative means of protest.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted

Orders

  • The three remaining named defendants are restrained from entering or remaining in safety zones around trees in Sheffield, preventing erection of safety zones, leaving vehicles in safety zones, or encouraging others to do so.
  • An order in the same terms is made against persons unknown intending to enter or remain in safety zones.