MR JUSTICE NICKLIN Approved Judgment
MBR Acres Ltd -v- Curtin
attempting to leave the Wyton Site (“the Third Incident”). The obstruction of the vehicles is also alleged to be part of a course of conduct involving harassment of the relevant employees by Mr Curtin and an interference with the First Claimant’s common law right of access to the highway. 214. The Production Manager and Employees B, J and V gave evidence at trial. The Claimants relied upon the evidence of Employees I and P in relation to this incident as hearsay. 215. In respect of the First Incident: (1) the Production Manager’s witness statement does not contain any evidence relating to an alleged obstruction of his/her vehicle entering the Wyton Site on 8 September 2021; (2) Employee AA’s witness statement does allege that Mr Curtin was part of the group of protestors involved in the First Incident. The evidence is limited to the allegation that Mr Curtin held a placard inches from his/her vehicle and shouted abuse, the content of which is not specified. Employee AA’s evidence does not state, in terms, that Mr Curtin obstructed his/her vehicle; and (3) Employees B, I, J, P and V’s witness statements also allege that Mr Curtin was part of the group of protestors involved in the First Incident. Employee B was driving the third vehicle in the convoy. S/he states that Mr Curtin stood on the Access Road with a placard “ to the front and side of my car ”. Employee I states that s/he was obstructed by Mr Curtin and another protestor both of whom stood “ to the front and side of my vehicle as I drove along the Access Road ” towards the gate. Employee I felt intimidated by the protestors’ actions. Employee P was the fifth car in the convoy. S/he said that Mr Curtin had held a placard in front of his/her window as s/he drove by. Employee V was driving the second vehicle in the convoy and said that s/he felt frightened during the incident. 216. Mr Curtin was cross-examined about most of these incidents. In respect of the First Incident, Mr Curtin accepted that he had trespassed on the First Claimant’s land, but stated that he was not aware that he was trespassing at the time. Ms Bolton did not ask Mr Curtin any questions in cross-examination about the alleged obstruction of vehicles entering the Wyton Site during the First Incident. 217. In relation to the Second Incident, the CCTV evidence shows that the van is forced to stop on the highway. Mr Curtin stood next to the vehicle and other protestors were standing either in the main carriageway or in the Access Road. Mr Curtin can be seen talking to the driver of the vehicle. The driver has not given evidence. Mr Curtin thought that he would simply have been engaging the driver in the usual conversation about the purpose of his/her visit and whether s/he was aware of the business of the First Claimant. 218. About 10 minutes later, the same van then attempts to leave the Wyton Site. Mr Curtin accepted that he and a few other protestors had obstructed the exit of the vehicle from the Wyton Site. Mr Curtin made the point that he had disconnected the banner to allow the vehicle to leave. He said that he had personally stood in the front of the vehicle only because he was concerned about a risk to the dog that was present. Mr Curtin accepted
121
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator