MR JUSTICE NICKLIN Approved Judgment
MBR Acres Ltd -v- Curtin
152. Employee F had worked at the Wyton Site since around 2015, including for the company that operated the site prior to the First Claimant. In his witness statement, Employee F gave some general evidence about the effect upon him/her of the demonstrations. One of the problems in this case is that the evidence – perhaps naturally – tends to focus upon the actions of “ the protestors ”, as a general group, and without always being careful to identify the acts of specific individuals. An individual protestor does not lose the right to demonstrate because of unlawful acts committed by others in the course of the demonstration if the individual in question behaves lawfully: Canada Goose -v- Persons Unknown [2020] 1 WLR 417 [99(8)]. 153. In one particular paragraph, Employee F stated:
“During the summer of 2021, the protests outside the Wyton Site became more intense, and it was not possible to enter or exit the Wyton Site safely. In particular, the staff cars trying to enter and exit the Wyton Site were frequently obstructed and surrounded by large groups of protestors. The abuse on particular days and threats and conduct of the Defendants towards me and others working at MBR is referred to in more detail below. It was, however, a terrifying experience entering and exiting the Wyton Site at this time, with protestors standing in front of and surrounding my vehicle on a daily basis, preventing me from freely accessing the Highway from the Wyton Site, or the Wyton Site from the Highway, whilst threatening me and abusing me in an angry and intense manner.”
154. Although the wording used in this paragraph of Employee F’s witness statement is very similar to that used by Mr Manning, and other witnesses who gave evidence – a point that Mr Curtin highlighted in cross-examination of some of the witnesses – I have no difficulty in accepting that it is an accurate description of what was happening at the Wyton Site in the summer of 2021, before the Interim Injunction was granted. During that period, there were occasions when the protestors were effectively dictating the terms on which people could access and leave the Wyton Site. I also accept that the experience of having their vehicles surrounded by protestors who were shouting at the occupants was frightening for Employee F and others. It is important, however, to isolate the allegedly harassing conduct for which Mr Curtin is responsible. 155. Employee F in his/her witness statement said this about the incident on 13 July 2021:
“On 13 July 2021 at 15.56 onwards, [various protestors including John Curtin], stood on the Highway and obstructed my vehicle as I sought to travel along the Access Road to the main carriageway of the Highway, having exited the Wyton Site. [John Curtin and two other protestors] stood to the front and side of my car, which prevented me driving freely along the Access Road as there was no clear pathway for my car through the protestors… Two protestors stood on the Access Road directly in front of my car, so that I had to stop for around 45 seconds. While my car was on the Access Road… John Curtin continually shouted at me through a megaphone… [Another protestor] continually shouted at me, leaning into my passenger side window. [A further protestor] held a placard reading: ‘STOP ANIMAL TESTING’ and took a video recording of my vehicle and those travelling inside. [This protestor] then moved to the front passenger window and continued to take a video recording of those of us travelling inside my car. I have seen the video that [this protestor] was live streaming and, while speaking to those watching his Facebook live video, he can be heard to say ‘Do you recognise these
108
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator