of the day, the temporary transit agreements provide a greater degree of flexibility and meet requirements for the same reasons as were expressed by the court in Test Valley BC v Bowers . However, the claimants need to approach the matter with an open mind and conscious that these are matters that are of great importance in the guidance provided by Wolverhampton and are relevant to the court to determine whether and if so on what terms any further injunction is required. 59. The advantage of formal policy and the advantage of constructive cooperation is that it becomes easier to judge the extent of the problem and the appropriate remedy, including the need for injunctions going forward. Thus it is the case that subject to any interim reviews, the matter should be brought back before the court in the first quarter of 2025. It is intended that the injunction will expire in early April. There will be a court date fixed for 20 March 2025 for any renewal. Any renewal application will have to be brought not later than four weeks before then and evidence served that will refer to the formal policy, which will be relevant to the exercise of discretion in the event that a renewal is sought.
The territorial limitation
60. It is an important part in the exercise of the court discretion that the injunction is not sought for the whole of the county. On the information before the court at present, the court is prepared to continue the injunction on the basis of the territory being restricted in the way in which it has been. However, that is not to say that if there was a need for a renewal, the court would be prepared to continue with the current territorial limitation. It may be that evidence should be addressed as to whether the current territory is wider than necessary and whether there are further restrictions to the area so that one concentrates on those areas and areas adjacent to there too, where public amenities are required to be protected from those who make unlawful encampments. That is not to say that the court would necessarily refuse an injunction on the basis of the current boundary. It is simply that the balance has to be struck between an area that is not so limited that the injunction lacks any practical effect and a restriction that is far wider than is required. Evidence to address that would be of importance in the event of any renewal. In any
Epiq Europe Ltd, Lower Ground, 46 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1JE www.epiqglobal.com/en-gb/
262
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator