MR JUSTICE NICKLIN Approved Judgment
MBR Acres Ltd -v- Curtin
that he had again tried to engage the driver in conversation as s/he left when another protestor stood in front of the vehicle. 219. In relation to the Third Incident, Mr Curtin accepted that he had been part of the protestor group who had obstructed vehicles leaving the Wyton Site as part of the daily ‘ritual’. The evidence shows that the effect of the obstruction was short-lived and – after a few minutes of delay – the vehicles made their way off along the highway. There is no evidence that anything harassing was shouted at the employees on this occasion. 220. My findings in relation to the three pleaded incidents on 8 September 2021 incident are: (1) During the First Incident, Mr Curtin trespassed on the First Claimant’s land and (with others) obstructed the vehicles of several employees who were attempting to enter the Wyton Site. The obstruction was short-lived; being measured only in minutes. At worst, it could have caused only minor inconvenience to each driver. (2) The two occasions of obstruction of the grey truck entering and later leaving the Wyton Site that make up the Second Incident were also short-lived, measured only in minutes. Again, if it caused any inconvenience to the driver (as to which there is no evidence) it could only have been trivial. The obstruction on these occasions could not remotely be described as harassing conduct (whether on its own or in combination with any other of the acts alleged against Mr Curtin). (3) During the Third Incident, Mr Curtin (with others) obstructed the vehicles leaving the Wyton Site from gaining access to the highway. As such, Mr Curtin interfered with the First Claimant’s common law right of access to the highway by being part of a group of protestors who stood around and at times in front of the vehicles as they attempted to leave the Wyton Site. The obstruction was short-lived; being measured in a few minutes. It will have caused only minor inconvenience. I do not accept that the actions of Mr Curtin in obstructing the vehicles were inherently harassing in nature (or had any elements that would mark them out as harassing) (4) To the extent that there was any obstruction of the highway in any of these incidents, on no occasion did the obstruction amount to a public nuisance. The obstruction on each occasion was temporary and, applying the test of what amounts to “public nuisance” (set out in [93] above), it affected only the specific individuals involved rather than the public generally. 13 September 2021 221. The Claimants allege that Mr Curtin (and others) trespassed on the Access Land and obstructed vehicles attempting to leave the Wyton Site. Employee C was driving a black Kia Sportage and Employee B was driving a silver Kia vehicle. 222. About an hour later, it is alleged that Mr Curtin (and others) trespassed on the same land and obstructed further vehicles, attempting to leave the Wyton Site: a white Volvo XC60 driven by the Production Manager, a white Skoda car driven by Employee AA and a blue Volkswagen driven by Employee A.
122
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator