MR JUSTICE NICKLIN Approved Judgment
MBR Acres Ltd -v- Curtin
“What I am dealing with there is we’ve got loads of volatile people around. It’s going to be a big demo day, let’s get the workers in… [The injunction] is a factor. We’ve got a lot of people coming today, a lot of people who have maybe never been there. I wanted to show … each other that we’re able to not act as everyone for themselves, an unruly mob. There’s many factors why I said that and the injunction is only one of those factors…” 195. The vehicles of the staff were guided into the Wyton Site by the police. Mr Curtin can be seen to be using a loud hailer trying to clear the way. 196. Ms Bolton then played the footage of the vehicles leaving at the end of the day. In contrast to the arrival of the vehicles, the protestors engaged in a substantial obstruction, and it took significant police intervention and a long time to enable the vehicles to leave. Vehicles were struck and apparently damaged by protestors. Mr Curtin said that, by this stage of the day, he had withdrawn and gone back to his tent. He had become disillusioned with some of the protest activities, and he had also been unable to communicate with the police. He said that he had attempted to speak to two of the usual police liaison officers, but that they had told him that it was out of their hands, and was being handled by a senior officer. Mr Curtin said he was not supportive of what some protestors had done that afternoon. 197. It was not apparent to me, given the absence of any allegation made against Mr Curtin in the Claimants’ case against him, the purpose of the cross-examination of Mr Curtin. I asked Ms Bolton whether she challenged Mr Curtin’s evidence that he was not present in the afternoon when the protestors effectively blockaded the Wyton Site for perhaps up to 2 hours and then used physical violence towards the vehicles when they did exit. Ms Bolton said that she was suggesting that Mr Curtin had failed to take a role in facilitating the staff leaving the Wyton Site in a similar way that he had done for their arrival earlier in the day. I do not find that criticism has any force. Mr Curtin is not responsible for the actions of other protestors. It is unreal to suggest that, on this day, Mr Curtin could have prevented what the police were unable to prevent. He did not join with or encourage the violent actions of a very small minority of the protestors. I accept Mr Curtin’s evidence that he did not support them and that he thought they were counterproductive. As the Claimants do not allege any wrongdoing on the part of Mr Curtin, there is nothing more that I need to add. 198. The relevance of the events on 15 August 2021 is to the claim made in relation to “Persons Unknown” (see [325] below). This was a rare instance where the evidence does show that the scale and duration of the obstruction of the carriageway outside the Wyton Site may arguably have amounted to a public nuisance. 4 September 2021 199. The Claimants allege that Mr Curtin trespassed on the Driveway and approached the open Gate where he is alleged to have shouted abuse at the First Claimant’s security staff. 200. In cross-examination, Mr Curtin accepted that he set foot again on the First Claimant’s land. He disputed that he knew he was trespassing at the time, but as trespass does not require any particular state of mind, no purpose is served by resolving this further issue.
118
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator