‘Coronavirus, or COVID-19, is impacting all parts of our lives. Currently, the focus in the construction industry is rightly on the safety of workers still attending sites. No doubt, the future will see litigation on whether the coronavirus gives rise to extensions of time, force majeure, frustration or other legal rights or remedies.’
Practical Law Construction Blog, 15th April 2020
‘This was a review hearing for a quia timet injunction against ‘car cruising’ in areas of the Claimant local authorities before His Honour Judge Worster sitting as a High Court Judge in the QBD, Birmingham District Registry. ‘Car cruising’, or ‘street cruising’ as it is sometimes defined, is a congregation of two or more motor vehicles driving dangerously or in an anti-social way so as to cause nuisance, damage or danger to the public; usually gatherings to race or perform stunts in cars, motorbikes or quad bikes, which have been a particular problem in particular parts of Birmingham.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 3rd April 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘On 3 April 2020, the government issued the guidance ‘Applying for a domestic violence (Family Law Act) injunction for unrepresented applicants’.’
Legal Aid Handbook, 6th April 2020
Source: legalaidhandbook.com
‘The clearing of ancient woods for HS2 is to proceed this month after the high court refused an emergency injunction and judicial review of the government’s decision to proceed with the high-speed railway.’
The Guardian, 3rd April 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Lawyers for five peaceful protestors, supported by the Weald Action Group, have applied to the High Court to bring an end to an interim injunction against protest at oil sites in Surrey and Sussex in line with a new Court of Appeal ruling.’
Garden Court Chambers, 1st April 2020
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘Chris Packham is seeking an urgent injunction to immediately halt HS2’s destruction of ancient woodlands as campaigners criticise construction teams for allegedly ignoring the government’s physical distancing rules for coronavirus and endangering local people.’
The Guardian, 27th March 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘On 5 March 2020 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd v Person Unknown [2020] EWCA Civ 303. The case concerned protests at the claimant’s Regent Street shop against the brand’s use of animal fur and down. But the Court of Appeal gave wide and authoritative guidance in relation to claims for injunctions against un-named defendants (“persons unknown.”)’
Hardwicke Chambers, 12th March 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘In this article, we look at the recent decision in the ongoing and highly publicised divorce case of Akhmedova v Akhmedov. This decision is the latest in a long run of enforcement cases brought by the wife against her former husband, who, in 2016, was ordered to pay her one of the largest reported financial settlements in England. While the judge was critical of the husband’s reorganisation of his assets to put and keep them beyond the wife’s reach, this is not the end of the road for this case. This judgment is simply another stepping-stone towards the wife realising the award she is entitled to.’
Family Law, 11th March 2020
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
A High Court judge has strongly criticised Slater & Gordon (S&G) for a “wholly unacceptable” failure to give him a crucial letter when applying for an urgent injunction in a police misconduct case.
Legal Futures, 4th March 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Widespread knowledge that a company is subject to a creditor’s winding up petition can cause that company serious harm. Where the creditor’s winding up petition is warranted, this harm may just be an unfortunate consequence of a valid legal process being pursued against it. However, where the creditor’s winding up petition is unwarranted, and is eventually dismissed because it is unwarranted, its dismissal will be ‘cold comfort’ to the company where, in the intervening period between presentation and dismissal, the company has suffered irreparable reputational and operational damage.’
33 Bedford Row, 4th February 2020
Source: www.33bedfordrow.co.uk
‘Bromley LBC had secured a without notice interim injunction in the High Court which prohibited encampment and entry/occupation in relation to all accessible public spaces in the Borough except cemeteries and highways. These amounted to 139 parks, recreation grounds or open spaces, and 32 public car parks. Although the injunction was against “persons unknown”, it was widely understood that the injunction was aimed at the Gypsy and Traveller community.’
No. 5 Chambers, 12th February 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘The Court of Appeal has just dismissed the actions in nuisance by residents of flats adjacent to the the Tate Modern art gallery on the south bank of the River Thames in central London. (Disclaimer: the author of this post has just moved into an apartment in the area but has no association with the flats or the residents central to this appeal.)’
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th February 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Flat owners overlooked by Tate Modern visitors on a viewing platform have been dealt a legal blow in a row over their privacy. Residents of Neo Bankside want to stop “hundreds of thousands of visitors” watching them from the platform. But the Court of Appeal has dismissed their claim to privacy saying they should “lower their solar blinds”.’
BBC News, 12th February 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Steven Woolf examines the Court of Appeal’s recent decision and guidance on Green Space borough-wide preventative injunctions.’
Local Government Lawyer, 7th February 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘In this month’s newsletter Daniel Gatty considers airspace, subsoil and rights of first refusal, in an article in part taken from his recent book, A Practical Guide to Rights over Airspace and Subsoil, available to purchase: here.’
Hardwicke Chambers, January 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal handed down a very significant judgment, dismissing an appeal by Bromley Council against the High Court’s decision to refuse the Council’s application for an injunction against “persons unknown” stopping on public land in the Borough.’
Garden Court Chambers, 21st January 2020
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘Steven Woolf examines the decision in London Borough of Bromley v Persons Unknown [2020] EWCA Civ 12.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 22nd January 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal, in The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Bromley v Persons Unknown [2020] EWCA Civ 12, has delivered a unanimous judgment reaffirming the rights of the Romany (“Gypsy”) and Traveller community to live in accordance with their traditional, nomadic way of life.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th January 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Over the last few years, there has been a real growth in “all borough” injunctions against anticipated trespass by gypsies and travellers. As far as the Court of Appeal could tell, there seem to be 38 presently in force. For obvious reasons, once one authority obtains such an injunction, the pressure builds on other authorities to do likewise. Moreover, because the injunctions are usually sought against “persons unknown” there are rarely, if ever, any represented defendants.’
Nearly Legal, 26th January 2020
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by the London Borough of Bromley over a High Court judge’s refusal to grant a borough-wide injunction on encampment at all accessible public spaces in the council’s area.’
Local Government Lawyer, 21st January 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025