Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

University of Birmingham v Persons Unknown & Anor

[2024] EWHC 1770 (KB)
Students protested on university land without permission. The university sued to get them to leave. The court ruled in favor of the university, saying the protest caused too much disruption and there were other ways to protest.

Key Facts

  • Students (and possibly others) set up an unauthorized encampment on the University of Birmingham campus to protest Israeli actions in Palestine.
  • Mariyah Ali, a student and the only identified defendant, claims the University's actions are unlawful on various grounds (discrimination, breach of public sector equality duty, breach of freedom of speech duty, and breach of Convention rights).
  • The University seeks a summary possession order under Part 55 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • The encampment caused disruption to university activities, including graduation ceremonies.
  • The University's Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech requires authorization for events.

Legal Principles

Test for summary possession order is the same as for summary judgment: no real prospect of successful defence and no other compelling reason for trial.

Global 100 Limited v Maria Laleva [2021] EWCA Civ 1835

If decisions to terminate a licence and bring possession proceedings are unlawful, there's a real prospect of successfully defending the claim.

Lewisham London Borough Council v Malcolm [2008] 1 AC 1399

Equality Act 2010: Discrimination occurs if, because of a protected characteristic, someone is treated less favorably.

Equality Act 2010, sections 13 and 91

Equality Act 2010: Public sector equality duty requires due regard to eliminating discrimination and fostering good relations.

Equality Act 2010, section 149

Education (No 2) Act 1986: Universities must take steps to ensure freedom of speech.

Education (No 2) Act 1986, section 43

Human Rights Act 1998: Public authorities cannot act incompatibly with Convention rights (Articles 9, 10, 11). Interference must be prescribed by law and necessary for the protection of others.

Human Rights Act 1998, section 6; Articles 9, 10, 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Proportionality test for interference with Convention rights: sufficient importance, rational connection, no less intrusive measure, balancing severity of effects against importance of objective.

Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) [2013] UKSC 39

Outcomes

Summary possession order granted for the entire University campus.

Ms. Ali lacked a real prospect of successfully defending the claim on any of her grounds. The University's actions were proportionate to protect its property rights and did not unlawfully infringe on Ms. Ali's Convention rights.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.