East Hertfordshire District Council v Doherty & Ors [2019] EWHC 2292 (QB) (05 September 2019)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Committal and Application to Vary/discharge Injunction / Interlocutory Judgment on Variation/discharge of Injunction; Sentencing for Contempt Reserved

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the injunction granted under s.187B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 should be varied or discharged in light of Article 8 ECHR and best interests of children
2. 2 Whether the Claimant abused procedure or failed in its public sector equality duty in obtaining the injunction
3. 3 Whether the continued enforcement of the injunction is necessary and proportionate given the Defendants' circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The injunction was lawfully and proportionately obtained in urgent circumstances to prevent unlawful occupation and development of rural land. The Claimant did not abuse procedure or fail in its equality duty, as the Defendants' identities and circumstances were unknown at the time. The continued enforcement of the injunction remains necessary and proportionate, as the Defendants knowingly breached planning control, have not provided sufficient evidence of hardship or lack of alternatives, and the planning application has been refused. The balance of interests favours upholding the injunction to protect planning control and the environment.

Court Disposition

Application to vary or discharge the injunction refused; injunction continues in force; sentencing for contempt reserved.

Orders

• Defendants' application to vary or discharge the injunction is refused.
• Injunction remains in force pending further order.