Linemile Properties Ltd & Anor v Plater & ASnor [2023] EWHC 810 (Ch) (05 April 2023)

Linemile Properties Ltd & Anor v Plater & ASnor [2023] EWHC 810 (Ch) (05 April 2023)

The lower court did not err in granting an interim injunction to protect the respondents' entitlement to legal and expert advice and to regulate the conduct of parties before it. The injunction was not a free-standing remedy for non-parties but was necessary to prevent disruption to the litigation and ensure unimpeded access to legal representation. The Siskina principle is no longer a constraint on the court's power to grant interim relief.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 810 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Linemile Properties Limited; Appellant/defendant: John Ellison; Respondent/claimant: George Anthony Plater; Respondent/claimant: Ioana Minodora Plater
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Right of Way, Harassment, Court Powers
Civil Procedure Property Law Equity Interim Injunctions Right of Way Harassment Court Powers

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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Linemile Properties Limited

Appellant/defendant

John Ellison

Appellant/defendant

George Anthony Plater

Respondent/claimant

Ioana Minodora Plater

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lower court erred in granting an interim injunction protecting non-parties.
  2. 2 Whether the injunction was justified absent a pleaded cause of action for the benefit of solicitors and experts.
  3. 3 Whether the court's power to grant interim relief is limited by The Siskina principle.

Ratio Decidendi

The lower court did not err in granting an interim injunction to protect the respondents' entitlement to legal and expert advice and to regulate the conduct of parties before it. The injunction was not a free-standing remedy for non-parties but was necessary to prevent disruption to the litigation and ensure unimpeded access to legal representation. The Siskina principle is no longer a constraint on the court's power to grant interim relief.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The interim injunction granted by HHJ Dodd remains in force until trial or further order.
  • Appellants are prohibited from abusing, harassing, assaulting, threatening, physically approaching, positioning themselves within 10 yards of, or speaking directly to specified persons including the respondents' solicitors and experts, except in HM Courts & Tribunal Services buildings.