National Highways Limited v Aaron Gunning & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1506 (KB)
National Highways Limited v Adelheid Russenberger & Ors
8 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 566 (KB)
High Court
Eighteen people broke a court order by protesting on the M25 motorway. Five admitted they knew about the order and broke it. The judge decided that some should go to jail for a short time, but they won't actually go to jail because they said sorry and promised not to do it again. Two others won't face any punishment because they'd already been punished for the same actions.
Key Facts
- •National Highways Limited (NHL) applied to commit 18 defendants for contempt of court for breaching a precautionary injunction against trespassing on M25 structures.
- •The injunction, granted by Chamberlain J, was served via alternative methods due to the defendants being 'Persons Unknown'.
- •Defendants were involved in Just Stop Oil (JSO) protests, causing significant motorway disruption.
- •Thirteen defendants claimed lack of knowledge of the injunction; eleven reached agreements with NHL, resulting in undertakings for future conduct.
- •Five defendants admitted knowledge of and breach of the injunction, leading to this judgment on sanction.
Legal Principles
There is no tariff for sanctions for contempt of court; the sanction depends on the facts and focuses on public interest in obeying court orders.
NHL v Heyatawin & ors [2021] EWHC 3078 (QB) at [48]-[53]; Kirin judgment [114]-[119]
The court considers culpability, harm caused, prejudice, pressure on the contemnor, deliberateness, cooperation, apology, and mitigating factors when determining sanction.
Kirin judgment [114]-[119]
Imprisonment is a serious sanction, reserved for serious contumacious flouting of court orders; the maximum sentence is 2 years.
Kirin judgment [114]-[119]
Conscientious motives are relevant, and a lesser sanction may be appropriate, but this does not justify flouting court orders with impunity.
Kirin judgment
An applicant for civil contempt has a legitimate private interest and can advocate for a particular sanction, subject to a high standard of fairness.
Navigator Equities v. Deripaska [2021] EWCA Civ 1799 at [137]-[138]; Business Mortgage Finance v. Hussain [2022] EWCA Civ 1264 at [131]
Outcomes
No penalty for Whitehouse and Springorum due to prior sentences for public nuisance.
The court considered the prior sentences sufficient punishment.
Rennie-Nash: 40-day committal (60 days less one-third credit), suspended for 2 years.
High culpability and harm, but mitigating factors such as age, apology, and character references led to suspension.
Hekt: 32-day committal (48 days less one-third credit), suspended for 2 years.
Mitigating factors included cooperation with police and apology.
Mitchell: 32-day committal (48 days less one-third credit), suspended for 2 years.
Mitigating factors included prior undertaking, compliance, caring responsibilities, and apology, although the apology was given shortly before the hearing.