England and Wales Case Law

Wolverhampton City Council & Ors v Persons Unknown & Ors

There have been no material changes in fact or law to justify discharge of the injunction or power of arrest. The Second Claimant is permitted to discontinue its claim. The injunction and power of arrest are continued (with minor amendments) for the remaining Claimants until 1 March 2027, with clarification of service and signage requirements and removal of the Second Claimant's area.

Source excerpt

• Injunctions against persons unknown
• Anti-social behaviour
• Street racing
• Power of arrest
• Alternative service
• Review hearings

Read case analysis

Birmingham City Council v Persons Unknown who participate or

There have been no material changes in fact or law since the last review to justify discharge or variation of the injunction and power of arrest. The orders have had a deterrent effect but the risk of street cruising persists. The procedural and substantive requirements for continuation are met, with minor amendments for clarity and reinstatement of signage requirements.

Source excerpt

• Injunctions
• Persons unknown
• Anti-social behaviour
• Contempt of court
• Alternative service
• Power of arrest

Read case analysis

Muhammad Aksahin v London Borough of Enfield

Appellant's presence as a passenger constituted participation in breach of the injunction, he had actual and constructive knowledge of the injunction, and the costs order and suspended committal were appropriate; no procedural irregularity or unfairness occurred.

Source excerpt

• Anti-social behaviour injunctions
• Car cruising
• Service of injunctions
• Contempt proceedings
• Costs orders

Read case analysis

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council v Persons Unknown

The High Court renewed Rochdale Council’s Traveller Injunction for 12 months against Persons Unknown, finding it remained effective, proportionate, and justified.

• Injunctions against persons unknown
• Unauthorised encampments
• Traveller injunctions
• Planning control
• Section 187b town and country planning act 1990
• Section 222 local government act 1972

Read case analysis

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council v Persons Unknown

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council v Persons Unknown [2026] EWHC 1214 (KB) (21 May 2026)

The High Court renewed Rochdale Council’s traveller injunction for 12 months, finding it had reduced unauthorised encampments and related harms and remained justified.

• Injunctions against persons unknown
• Traveller injunctions
• Breach of planning control
• Section 187b town and country planning act 1990
• Section 222 local government act 1972
• Service requirements for persons unknown

Read case analysis

Mudford Parish Council v Somerset Council (Rev1)

Mudford Parish Council v Somerset Council (Rev1) [2026] EWHC 1166 (Admin) (15 May 2026)

The High Court rejected a parish council’s challenge to planning permission for a large mixed-use extension in Somerset, holding that Policy YV2 was lawfully applied.

• Interpretation of local plan policy
• Judicial review of planning permission
• Section 106 agreements
• Phasing and delivery of mixed-use developments
• Planning-policy-interpretation
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

Hollinworth v Valuation Tribunal for England & Wakefield Met District Council, Billing Authority

Hollinworth v Valuation Tribunal for England & Wakefield Met District Council, Billing Authority [2026] EWHC 1149 (Admin) (14 May 2026)

The High Court allowed a council tax liability appeal, set aside the Valuation Tribunal’s decisions, and remitted the case because relevant evidence had not been fully considered.

• Council tax liability
• Procedural fairness
• Case management
• Statutory appeal
• Article 6 echr
• Council-tax-liability

Read case analysis

Nigel Hollinworth v The Valuation Tribunal for England & Wakefield Met District Council, Billing Authority

The High Court allowed Mr Hollinworth’s appeal, set aside the Valuation Tribunal’s 2025 decisions, and remitted the council tax dispute for rehearing.

• Council tax liability
• Procedural fairness
• Case management
• Statutory appeals
• Council-tax-liability
• Procedural-fairness

Read case analysis

Middlewich Town Council v Middlewich Cemetery Joint Committee Board & Ors

The Court found that the Cemetery is owned by the Claimant and subject to the Local Government Act 1972, rendering the Tomlin Order void. The Defendants must deliver up all records and control of the Cemetery, provide an account for all funds, and explain discrepancies. The injunction is extended to the First to Sixth Defendants, including material relating to the Outlook email account and all relevant bank accounts. The Sixth and Seventh Defendants are not liable to provide an account or bear liability for misappropriated funds due to lack of involvement.

Source excerpt

• Statutory interpretation of local government act 1972
• Delegation of statutory functions
• Injunctions
• Misappropriation of public funds
• Bank account control
• Provision of accounts

Read case analysis

N Quinn v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The Council was not entitled to withhold the entirety of the Max Associates Report and PDG Report under s43(2) FOIA, as much of the information would not, or would only to a low degree, prejudice its commercial interests, and the public interest in transparency and accountability outweighed the exemption. The Council also failed to comply with its duty to provide information about the publication of the 2024 Leisure Charges. The Decision Notice was not in accordance with the law to the extent stated.

Source excerpt

• Freedom of information
• Commercial interests exemption
• Public interest test
• Transparency in public authorities
• Disclosure of public authority reports

Read case analysis