NORTH WARWICKSHIRE BOROUGH COUNCIL v NICHOLAS ONLEY

NORTH WARWICKSHIRE BOROUGH COUNCIL v NICHOLAS ONLEY

The defendants admitted to breaching the terms of the interim injunction by participating in a protest that obstructed access to Kingsbury Oil Terminal. The breaches were serious enough to cross the custody threshold, but for first-time or less persistent offenders, custodial sentences were suspended due to mitigating factors and the civil disobedience context. For repeat offenders, immediate custodial sentences were imposed. Costs orders were made against those not receiving immediate custody.

Parties
Claimant: North Warwickshire Borough Council; Defendant: Nicholas Onley; Defendant: Peter Lay; Defendant: Simon Milner-Edwards; Defendant: Christian Murray-Leslie; Defendant: Michelle Cadet-Rose; Defendant: Victoria Lindsell; Defendant: Margaret Reid
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Contempt Proceedings / Sentencing Judgment After Admissions of Breach of Injunction
Outcome
Defendants found in contempt of court for breach of injunction; custodial sentences imposed, some suspended, some immediate; costs orders made against certain defendants.
Legal Topics
Breach of Injunction, Civil Disobedience, Sentencing for Contempt, Protest Law
Civil Procedure Injunctions Contempt of Court Breach of Injunction Civil Disobedience Sentencing for Contempt Protest Law

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

North Warwickshire Borough Council

Claimant

Nicholas Onley

Defendant

Peter Lay

Defendant

Simon Milner-Edwards

Defendant

Christian Murray-Leslie

Defendant

Michelle Cadet-Rose

Defendant

Victoria Lindsell

Defendant

Margaret Reid

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contempt Proceedings / Sentencing Judgment After Admissions of Breach of Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants breached the terms of the interim injunction
  2. 2 Appropriate penalty for contempt of court arising from breach of injunction
  3. 3 Whether sentences should be suspended or immediate

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants admitted to breaching the terms of the interim injunction by participating in a protest that obstructed access to Kingsbury Oil Terminal. The breaches were serious enough to cross the custody threshold, but for first-time or less persistent offenders, custodial sentences were suspended due to mitigating factors and the civil disobedience context. For repeat offenders, immediate custodial sentences were imposed. Costs orders were made against those not receiving immediate custody.

Court Disposition

Defendants found in contempt of court for breach of injunction; custodial sentences imposed, some suspended, some immediate; costs orders made against certain defendants.

Orders

  • Nicholas Onley: 19 days' imprisonment, suspended for two years, costs of £412.46 payable at £10/month.
  • Peter Lay: 19 days' imprisonment, suspended for two years, costs of £412.46 payable at £10/month.