Wolverhampton City Council & Ors v Persons Unknown [2020] EWHC 759 (QB) (30 March 2020)

Wolverhampton City Council & Ors v Persons Unknown [2020] EWHC 759 (QB) (30 March 2020)

The continued injunction against car cruising is justified as the requirements for quia timet relief against persons unknown are met, the order is proportionate, effective, and necessary to prevent public nuisance and protect public safety, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The order is sufficiently precise, properly publicised, and no grounds exist for variation or discharge.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 759
Parties
Claimant: Wolverhampton City Council; Claimant: Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council; Claimant: Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council; Claimant: Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council; Defendant: Persons unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Injunction Application (review) / Review Hearing of Extended Injunction Order
Outcome
Order to continue in force
Legal Topics
Injunctions Against Persons Unknown, Quia Timet Injunctions, Public Nuisance, Car Cruising, Proportionality of Injunctions, Alternative Service of Orders
Civil Procedure Public Order Local Government Law Injunctions Against Persons Unknown Quia Timet Injunctions Public Nuisance Car Cruising Proportionality of Injunctions +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wolverhampton City Council

Claimant

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council

Claimant

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council

Claimant

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council

Claimant

Persons unknown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Injunction Application (review) / Review Hearing of Extended Injunction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the continued injunction against car cruising in the Black Country area remains justified and proportionate
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for granting injunctions against persons unknown are met
  3. 3 Whether the order should be varied or discharged in light of recent case law and public consultation

Ratio Decidendi

The continued injunction against car cruising is justified as the requirements for quia timet relief against persons unknown are met, the order is proportionate, effective, and necessary to prevent public nuisance and protect public safety, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The order is sufficiently precise, properly publicised, and no grounds exist for variation or discharge.

Court Disposition

Order to continue in force

Orders

  • The existing injunction order continues in force without variation or discharge.
  • No further order is required.