THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE NICKLIN Approved Judgment
MBR Acres Ltd -v- McGivern
occasionally using a loudhailer. There is no audio recording that demonstrates what was said. At this point, Ms McGivern is standing about 4-5 metres to the left of the noticeboard where the Injunction was displayed. Whilst talking to Mr Maher and others, Ms McGivern can be seen occasionally to look back towards the gates of the Wyton Site and to shake her head. It is clear that vehicles occasionally leave the Wyton Site and that this provokes shouting by the protestors and use of the loudhailer by Mr Maher. There are occasional hand gestures by Ms McGivern and the protestors, but without knowing the conversation they are impossible to interpret. iv) At 16.10, Ms McGivern crossed back over the carriageway. It appears that her attention has been drawn to another vehicle that is about to leave the Wyton Site. Ms McGivern walks to the gateway and stands in front of a green Vauxhall Mokka, that is the subject of ground 7. At one point, for a matter of seconds, Ms McGivern stepped into the yellow hatched area beyond the metal strip on the ground marking the property of the First Claimant. Ms McGivern, whilst standing in front of the vehicle, can be seen to be speaking to someone (who is not visible) to the right of the vehicle. The car reverses after about 20-30 seconds. Shortly thereafter, Ms McGivern points to the noticeboard to the left of the gate. At 16.11 she leaves the gate area and walks back across the road to speak again to the protestors on the opposite side of the carriageway. She can be seen speaking to them for about a minute, before she crosses the road and leaves in her vehicle, driving off at just before 16.15. 26. The Claimants contend that Ms McGivern is bound by the Injunction because, by her actions, she has brought herself within the definition of the Fifteenth to Seventeenth Defendants “Persons Unknown” and she is deemed to have been served with the Injunction as a result of the alternative service order. In her Eighth Affidavit, Ms Pressick stated that David Manning, a security officer at the Wyton Site, had posted the Injunction on the noticeboard opposite the Wyton Site at approximately 14.42 on 29 April 2022 (the time having been established by reference to CCTV footage). 27. As to the identification of Ms McGivern, Ms Pressick stated that, as a result of receipt of an email from Ms McGivern on 19 May 2022, she had looked at Ms McGivern’s profile on her firm’s website which included a photograph of Ms McGivern. Ms Pressick considered that Ms McGivern might be the person who she believed had “ committed… multiple breaches of the Injunction ”. However, she was not sure. As a result, the Claimants’ solicitors, Mills & Reeve, sent an email to Ms McGivern asking her to confirm that she was the person shown in a still image captured from the CCTV footage of events on 4 May 2022. On 19 May 2022, Ms McGivern responded: “I work with the Credence Law Group, who currently advise or act for a number of Camp Beagle protestors in respect of criminal matters. In my personal capacity I am assisting a number of the defendants named in the injunction proceedings… Might I inquire why you seek confirmation of my identity”. Mills & Reeve responded, on 20 May 2022: “In terms of enquiries as to identity, our clients were not seeking confirmation of your identity per se – rather they were seeking confirmation as to the identity of the individual in the photograph we sent, which they believe to be you. From your
441
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator