Three Counties Agricultural Society v Persons Unknown & Ors [2022] EWHC 2708 (KB) (26 October 2022)

Three Counties Agricultural Society v Persons Unknown & Ors [2022] EWHC 2708 (KB) (26 October 2022)

The court found that the claimant established a real and imminent risk of unlawful protest activity (trespass, nuisance, obstruction) recurring at the 2022 event. The injunction terms are sufficiently clear, proportionate, and do not prohibit lawful protest. The balance of convenience and proportionality favours granting the injunction to protect the claimant's rights while preserving lawful protest rights.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2708 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Three Counties Agricultural Society; Defendant: Persons Unknown and Others; Interested Person: Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT); Interested Person: Sian Aubrey
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Precautionary (quia Timet) Injunction and Possession Order / Interim Injunction Hearing
Outcome
Injunction granted as sought by the claimant, with modifications to address objections.
Legal Topics
Precautionary Injunctions, Trespass, Nuisance, Freedom of Assembly, Freedom of Expression, Protest Law, Possession Orders
Civil Procedure Human Rights Tort Law Precautionary Injunctions Trespass Nuisance Freedom of Assembly Freedom of Expression +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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Three Counties Agricultural Society

Claimant

Persons Unknown and Others

Defendant

Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT)

Interested Person

Sian Aubrey

Interested Person

Procedural Posture

Application for Precautionary (quia Timet) Injunction and Possession Order / Interim Injunction Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a precautionary injunction should be granted against persons unknown to prevent unlawful protest activity at the 3CDSE event
  2. 2 Whether the injunction terms strike a fair balance between the rights of protestors under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR and the rights of the claimant to hold the event without unlawful disruption
  3. 3 Whether the injunction terms are sufficiently precise and proportionate

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant established a real and imminent risk of unlawful protest activity (trespass, nuisance, obstruction) recurring at the 2022 event. The injunction terms are sufficiently clear, proportionate, and do not prohibit lawful protest. The balance of convenience and proportionality favours granting the injunction to protect the claimant's rights while preserving lawful protest rights.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted as sought by the claimant, with modifications to address objections.

Orders

  • Precautionary injunction granted against persons unknown and others, prohibiting trespass, obstruction, and interference with access to the Three Counties Showground during the specified period.
  • Order for possession of the land granted to the claimant.