SHELL UK LTD AGAINST STICHTING GREENPEACE COUNCIL AND ANOTHER [2020] ScotCS CSOH_7 (15 January 2020)

SHELL UK LTD AGAINST STICHTING GREENPEACE COUNCIL AND ANOTHER [2020] ScotCS CSOH_7 (15 January 2020)

The court held that Shell, as proprietor/operator, is entitled to protection against unlawful occupation of its installations. The restriction sought is proportionate, as it applies to private property, does not prevent protest by other means, and does not destroy the essence of the defenders' rights under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR. The balance of convenience favours maintaining the status quo and protecting safety and property rights. Interim interdict is therefore justified.

Citation
[2020] ScotCS CSOH_7
Parties
Pursuer: Shell UK Limited; Defenders: Stichting Greenpeace Council and Another
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (interdict) / Motion for Interim Interdict
Outcome
interim interdict granted
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Protest Rights, Trespass/unlawful Occupation, Freedom of Expression (echr Article 10), Freedom of Assembly (echr Article 11), Property Rights, Offshore Installations, Environmental Regulation
Civil Procedure Human Rights Property Law Environmental Law Interim Interdict Protest Rights Trespass/unlawful Occupation Freedom of Expression (echr Article 10) +4 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shell UK Limited

Pursuer

Stichting Greenpeace Council and Another

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil (interdict) / Motion for Interim Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim interdict should be granted to prevent Greenpeace and others from approaching or boarding Shell's offshore installations within 500 metres
  2. 2 Whether such interdict is a proportionate restriction on rights under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR (freedom of expression and assembly)
  3. 3 Whether the defenders' protest actions constitute unlawful occupation or trespass under Scots law

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Shell, as proprietor/operator, is entitled to protection against unlawful occupation of its installations. The restriction sought is proportionate, as it applies to private property, does not prevent protest by other means, and does not destroy the essence of the defenders' rights under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR. The balance of convenience favours maintaining the status quo and protecting safety and property rights. Interim interdict is therefore justified.

Court Disposition

interim interdict granted

Orders

  • Defenders and those acting on their behalf are interdicted from approaching within 500 metres of, boarding, or attempting to board the specified offshore installations, and from instructing, procuring, encouraging or facilitating others to do so.