Fitzwilliam Land Company & Ors v Cheesman & Ors [2018] EWHC 3139 (QB) (16 November 2018)

Fitzwilliam Land Company & Ors v Cheesman & Ors [2018] EWHC 3139 (QB) (16 November 2018)

The court found that it is more likely than not that certain named defendants and persons unknown have trespassed and will continue to trespass on the Claimants' land, and that there is no sufficient defence to trespass based on protest or alleged illegality of hunting. The balance of convenience, including the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 3139
Parties
Claimant: Fitzwilliam Land Company; Claimant: Milton (Peterborough) Estates Company; Claimant: Sir Philip Vyvian Naylor-Leyland Bt; Claimant: Highwoods Farms Limited; Defendant: Gareth Cheesman; Defendant: Lisa Jackson; Defendant: Paul Benton; Defendant: Steven Milton; Defendant: Phil Garrard; Defendant: Phil Joseph Walters; Defendant: Paula Lamont; Defendant: David Blenkinsopp; Defendant: Matthew Spencer; Defendant: Clive Richardson; Defendant: Mickey Bryce; Defendant: Ruth Nicholls; Defendant: Jennifer Alfreton; Defendant: Emily Hepburn; Defendant: Persons Unknown entering or remaining without the consent of the Claimant(s) on the land identified in the Second Schedule to the brief details of claim and not subject to public rights of way with a view to protesting against the Fitzwilliam (Milton) Hunt ("the Hunt") or otherwise obstructing the Hunt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application in Civil Trespass and Protest Proceedings / Interim Relief (pre Trial)
Outcome
Interim injunction granted in part
Legal Topics
Trespass to Land, Quia Timet Injunctions, Protest Law, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Assembly, Hunting Act 2004, Balance of Convenience, Representative Actions
Civil Procedure Property Law Human Rights Trespass to Land Quia Timet Injunctions Protest Law Freedom of Expression Freedom of Assembly +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fitzwilliam Land Company

Claimant

Milton (Peterborough) Estates Company

Claimant

Sir Philip Vyvian Naylor-Leyland Bt

Claimant

Highwoods Farms Limited

Claimant

Gareth Cheesman

Defendant

Lisa Jackson

Defendant

Paul Benton

Defendant

Steven Milton

Defendant

Phil Garrard

Defendant

Phil Joseph Walters

Defendant

Paula Lamont

Defendant

David Blenkinsopp

Defendant

Matthew Spencer

Defendant

Clive Richardson

Defendant

Mickey Bryce

Defendant

Ruth Nicholls

Defendant

Jennifer Alfreton

Defendant

Emily Hepburn

Defendant

Persons Unknown entering or remaining without the consent of the Claimant(s) on the land identified in the Second Schedule to the brief details of claim and not subject to public rights of way with a view to protesting against the Fitzwilliam (Milton) Hunt ("the Hunt") or otherwise obstructing the Hunt

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application in Civil Trespass and Protest Proceedings / Interim Relief (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim injunctive relief should be granted to restrain trespass by protestors (including persons unknown) on private land used for hunting activities
  2. 2 Whether the balance of convenience favours granting an injunction in light of competing property rights and protestors' rights to freedom of expression and assembly
  3. 3 Whether allegations of illegality in the Claimants' hunting activities affect entitlement to injunctive relief

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that it is more likely than not that certain named defendants and persons unknown have trespassed and will continue to trespass on the Claimants' land, and that there is no sufficient defence to trespass based on protest or alleged illegality of hunting. The balance of convenience, including the protection of property rights and risk of public disorder, favours granting an interim injunction restraining trespass to land, but not extending to animals or goods at this stage. The injunction is limited in scope and duration, pending a speedy trial.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted in part

Orders

  • Interim injunction restraining named defendants (D1, D2, D4, D6, D7, D11, D14) and persons unknown from trespassing on the Claimants' land, pending trial or further order
  • No interim injunction granted in respect of trespass to animals or goods