Surrey Heath Borough Council v Robb & Ors [2020] EWHC 2014 (QB) (06 July 2020)

Surrey Heath Borough Council v Robb & Ors [2020] EWHC 2014 (QB) (06 July 2020)

The injunction should be continued in its current form until trial because there is a sufficiently strong prima facie case of serious planning breaches, the balance of convenience favours the claimant, the defendants have not demonstrated homelessness or lack of alternatives, and the order is proportionate and justified under Article 8 ECHR and s.187B(1) TCPA. The imminent speedy trial will allow full consideration of the merits and cross-examination.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2014 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Surrey Heath Borough Council; Defendant: James Robb; Defendant: Suzanne Robb; Defendant: Thomas Robb Jnr; Defendant: Kaitlyn Robb; Defendant: Scarlett Rooney; Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction Under S.187 B(1) Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Interim Hearing on Continuation of Injunction Pending Speedy Trial
Outcome
Interim injunction continued until trial; application for permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Planning Control, Green Belt, Gypsies and Travellers, Article 8 ECHR, Equality Act 2010, Children's Rights
Planning Law Human Rights Law Public Law Interim Injunctions Planning Control Green Belt Gypsies and Travellers Article 8 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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Surrey Heath Borough Council

Claimant

James Robb

Defendant

Suzanne Robb

Defendant

Thomas Robb Jnr

Defendant

Kaitlyn Robb

Defendant

Scarlett Rooney

Defendant

Persons Unknown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction Under S.187 B(1) Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Interim Hearing on Continuation of Injunction Pending Speedy Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to continue an interim injunction restraining use and occupation of land as a residential gypsy caravan site pending trial
  2. 2 Whether the balance of convenience and proportionality justify exclusion of the defendants from the site
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' Article 6, 8 and 14 ECHR rights and the best interests of children require variation or discharge of the injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The injunction should be continued in its current form until trial because there is a sufficiently strong prima facie case of serious planning breaches, the balance of convenience favours the claimant, the defendants have not demonstrated homelessness or lack of alternatives, and the order is proportionate and justified under Article 8 ECHR and s.187B(1) TCPA. The imminent speedy trial will allow full consideration of the merits and cross-examination.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction continued until trial; application for permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • The injunction restraining use and occupation of the land as a residential gypsy caravan site is continued until trial.
  • Directions for a speedy trial in the week commencing 24 August 2020.