Garden Court Chambers welcomes you to a series of webinars on protest rights brought to you by protest law barristers from our crime and civil liberties teams.
|Date:||Tuesday 14 July 2020|
|Time:||1pm - 2:15pm|
|Areas of Law:||Protest Rights, Criminal Defence, Civil Liberties and Human Rights|
Large corporations and local government are increasingly turning towards injunctions to restrict the right to demonstrate. This webinar looked at means to defend injunctions, challenge the torts frequently used and protect freedom of expression, as well as defending contempt of court proceedings for those alleged to have breached court orders. It looked at the recent Court of Appeal decisions in Boyd v INEOS, Lawrie v Cuadrilla Bowland and Canada Goose v Persons Unknown.
It was part of a series of webinars on protest law. See here.
Owen Greenhall, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers (Call: 2010)(Chair)
Stephanie Harrison QC, Barrister & Joint Head of Chambers, Garden Court Chambers (Call: 1991)(Silk: 2013)
Stephen Simblet QC, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers (Call: 1991)(Silk: 2020)
Tim Baldwin, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers (Call: 2001)
Webinars in this series:
Protest, Pandemic and Proportionality (held on 16 June 2020)
Know your rights: Kettles and facial recognition (23 June 2020)
Justification Defences: Direct action and freedom of expression (30 June 2020)
Trial Issues in Protest Cases (7 July 2020)
Please see a recording of the webinar below.
As a postscript, in this law report of Hillingdon London Borough Council v Persons Unknown (2020) it is stated that "The court would not be prepared to grant an injunction that would prevent a protestor from walking on the land and carrying a protest banner or flags and singing anti-HS2 songs.”
An example of a strike out of an application to commit concerning the conduct of the applicant can be found in this commentary on Navigator Equities Ltd & Anor v Deripaska  EWHC 1798 (Comm).