Approved Judgment
(ii) The efficacy of the Order 62.
In my judgment it is perfectly clear on the evidence that the Injunction has been highly effective. Whilst there are still unauthorised encampments that occur in the Borough, and occur on Injunction Sites specifically, the frequency and duration of those encampments, and the resulting harm, is greatly reduced. 63. As Mr Johns explains, there has been a significant reduction in the number of unauthorised encampments forming in the Borough. The reduced frequency, duration and size of unauthorised encampments has caused a significant reduction in the harm suffered by reason of those encampments. There have been no deposits of untreated human waste associated with unauthorised encampments since the grant of injunctive relief; the frequency and duration of encampments in industrial areas has reduced; there have been reduced instances of threats to and intimidation of the inhabitants of the Borough, reduced instances of community tension, and reduced instances of property damage (with no instances at all since the grant of the Injunction in June 2024). 64. Incidents of fly-tipping associated with unauthorised encampments, and the cost incurred by the Claimant in clearing the same, have been greatly reduced. Clean-up costs incurred by the Claimant peaked at £87,895.63 in 2017, and have fallen to nil since 2019. 65. All this evidence serves to establish that the Injunction has achieved its objectives. (iii) Justification for the continuation of the Order 66. In my judgment, it is well established on the evidence that the potential harm which prompted the application for the injunction persists. The fact that, on occasions, unauthorised encampments appear in the Borough (albeit with reduced frequency) demonstrates that continued risk. 67. Furthermore, unauthorised encampments continue to occur in areas geographically close to Rochdale. The fear of the Claimant’s officers that should the Injunction be discharged, those encampments will “migrate” into the Borough, and to the 334 protected sites specifically is, in my view, entirely realistic given the history. That is particularly so given that those sites appear, historically, to be especially attractive to those forming unauthorised encampments. On the evidence, it is clear that it is the existence of the Injunction, and the threat of enforcement by arrest, which discourages the establishment of unauthorised encampments, and limits their size and duration of such encampments as do occur. 68. The experience of neighbouring local authorities in the Greater Manchester area supports that conclusion. Of the five local authorities that responded to enquiries from the Claimant, all but one reported a higher number of unauthorised encampments in the last 12 months than in Rochdale. By way of example, Wigan Council reported 64 encampments, which caused £124,000 in removal costs and associated expenses, and £17,248 of council officer time. (iv) Grounds for Discharge 69. I have been able to detect no possible grounds for the discharge of the order.
38
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator