MBR Acres Ltd & Ors v Curtin [2025] EWHC 331 (KB) (19 February 2025)

MBR Acres Ltd & Ors v Curtin [2025] EWHC 331 (KB) (19 February 2025)

Protest activities that physically encroach on claimants' land or obstruct access to the highway constitute trespass and actionable interference; flying drones over the Wyton Site does not amount to trespass unless it interferes with ordinary use; injunctions against 'Persons Unknown' are permissible only under strict criteria post-Wolverhampton; harassment claims require evidence of course of conduct causing alarm or distress.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 331 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: MBR Acres Limited; Claimant: Demetris Markou; Claimant: B & K Universal Limited; Claimant: Susan Pressick; Defendant: John Curtin; Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim against Mr Curtin partially succeeds; injunction granted against specified protest activities; contra mundum injunction granted against 'Persons Unknown' under strict terms; contempt application against Mr Curtin upheld with penalty imposed.
Legal Topics
Trespass, Public Nuisance, Harassment, Injunctions, Freedom of Expression, Contempt of Court, Alternative Service, Representative Actions
Tort Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Trespass Public Nuisance Harassment Injunctions 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MBR Acres Limited

Claimant

Demetris Markou

Claimant

B & K Universal Limited

Claimant

Susan Pressick

Claimant

John Curtin

Defendant

Persons Unknown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether protest activities at the Wyton Site constitute trespass, public nuisance, harassment, or unlawful interference with access to the highway
  2. 2 Whether flying drones over the Wyton Site amounts to trespass
  3. 3 Lawfulness and scope of injunctions against 'Persons Unknown' post-Wolverhampton Supreme Court decision

Ratio Decidendi

Protest activities that physically encroach on claimants' land or obstruct access to the highway constitute trespass and actionable interference; flying drones over the Wyton Site does not amount to trespass unless it interferes with ordinary use; injunctions against 'Persons Unknown' are permissible only under strict criteria post-Wolverhampton; harassment claims require evidence of course of conduct causing alarm or distress.

Court Disposition

Claim against Mr Curtin partially succeeds; injunction granted against specified protest activities; contra mundum injunction granted against 'Persons Unknown' under strict terms; contempt application against Mr Curtin upheld with penalty imposed.

Orders

  • Injunction restraining trespass and obstruction at Wyton Site
  • Contra mundum injunction against 'Persons Unknown'