Julian Roger Hallam & Ors v R

Julian Roger Hallam & Ors v R

Sentencing judges must consider conscientious motivation as relevant to culpability, assess proportionality of interference with ECHR rights, and impose the shortest sentence commensurate with seriousness; manifestly excessive sentences must be reduced, but immediate custody is justified given the scale, planning, and harm of the offences.

Parties
Appellant: Julian Roger Hallam; Appellant: Lucia Whittaker de Abreu; Appellant: Daniel Shaw; Appellant: Louise Charlotte Lancaster; Appellant: Cressida Gethin; Appellant: Paul Sousek; Appellant: Gaie Delap; Appellant: Theresa Higginson; Appellant: Paul Bell; Appellant: George Simonson; Appellant: Chris Bennett; Appellant: Joe Howlett; Appellant: Samuel Johnson; Appellant: Larch Maxey; Appellant: Phoebe Plummer; Appellant: Anna Ellen Holland; Respondent: Rex; Intervener: Friends of the Earth Ltd; Intervener: Greenpeace Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part; sentences reduced for some appellants, others dismissed.
Legal Topics
Public Nuisance, Criminal Damage, Sentencing Principles, Protest Law, ECHR Articles 10 and 11, Conspiracy, Environmental Protest
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Public Nuisance Criminal Damage Sentencing Principles Protest Law ECHR Articles 10 and 11 Conspiracy +1 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 6 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julian Roger Hallam

Appellant

Lucia Whittaker de Abreu

Appellant

Daniel Shaw

Appellant

Louise Charlotte Lancaster

Appellant

Cressida Gethin

Appellant

Paul Sousek

Appellant

Gaie Delap

Appellant

Theresa Higginson

Appellant

Paul Bell

Appellant

George Simonson

Appellant

Chris Bennett

Appellant

Joe Howlett

Appellant

Samuel Johnson

Appellant

Larch Maxey

Appellant

Phoebe Plummer

Appellant

Anna Ellen Holland

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Friends of the Earth Ltd

Intervener

Greenpeace Ltd

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sentences imposed for protest-related offences were manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Proper application of sentencing principles for non-violent protest
  3. 3 Engagement and effect of ECHR Articles 10 and 11 in protest cases

Ratio Decidendi

Sentencing judges must consider conscientious motivation as relevant to culpability, assess proportionality of interference with ECHR rights, and impose the shortest sentence commensurate with seriousness; manifestly excessive sentences must be reduced, but immediate custody is justified given the scale, planning, and harm of the offences.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part; sentences reduced for some appellants, others dismissed.

Orders

  • Quash sentences in M25 Conspiracy Case; substitute: Hallam 4 years, Shaw 3 years, Whittaker de Abreu 30 months, Lancaster 3 years, Gethin 30 months imprisonment.
  • Quash Delap's sentence in M25 Gantry Climbers Case; substitute 18 months imprisonment.