Maidstone BC v Goliea Brazil & Ors.
[2023] EWHC 965 (KB)
The Mayor & Burgesses of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames v Michael Casey & Ors
25 July 2024
[2024] EWHC 2252 (KB)
High Court
A council got court orders to stop people from illegally placing caravans on land. The judge said there's been a long history of problems, and the council showed there's a good chance the illegal activity will continue unless stopped. The orders prevent further illegal activity until a full hearing later.
Key Facts
- •Unauthorised caravans/mobile homes on land known as Birches, Chessington.
- •First defendant, Michael Casey, is the registered freeholder.
- •Long history of breaches of planning permission and previous injunctions.
- •Council sought injunction under section 187B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972.
- •Multiple applications before the court: interim injunction against named defendants, joining additional defendants, and interim injunction against Persons Unknown.
- •Substantial evidence of breaches, including extensive hardstanding, hardcore deposits, and exceeding the permitted number of caravans.
- •Two additional mobile homes were sited after service of the claim form.
- •Defendants did not appear and were not represented.
Legal Principles
American Cyanamid test for interim injunctions (serious issue to be tried, adequacy of damages, balance of convenience).
American Cyanamid
Principles for granting injunctions against Persons Unknown, derived from Wolverhampton City Council v London Gypsies and Travellers [2023] UKSC 47 and Barking and Dagenham.
Wolverhampton City Council v London Gypsies and Travellers [2023] UKSC 47; Barking and Dagenham
CPR 19.4(1) and (3) govern applications to join additional defendants.
CPR 19.4(1) and (3)
CPR 19.2(2)(a) and (b) govern applications to join parties where it is desirable to resolve all matters in dispute.
CPR 19.2(2)(a) and (b)
Considerations regarding adequacy of damages in injunction cases, referencing South Downs National Park Authority v Darrowby [2018] EWHC 1903 (QB).
South Downs National Park Authority v Darrowby [2018] EWHC 1903 (QB)
Outcomes
Interim injunction granted against the first to fourth defendants (agreed).
Agreed between parties.
Application to join sixth to eighth defendants granted.
Evidence suggests involvement in recent breaches; desirable to resolve all matters in dispute.
Interim relief granted against the sixth to eighth defendants.
Serious issues to be tried, damages inadequate, balance of convenience favours granting relief to maintain the status quo and prevent further breaches.
Interim injunction granted against Persons Unknown.
Compelling justification based on history of breaches, inadequacy of other remedies, and recent actions suggesting attempts to frustrate the proceedings. Council took reasonable steps to bring the application to the attention of those likely to be affected.