Judgment Approved by the court for handing down.
Double-click to enter the short title
the fourth witness statement of Nicholas Waite, the Gypsy liaison officer of the Second Claimant. The first two witnesses give detailed evidence of wrongful conduct requiring of a remedy. It is summarised above under the consideration of the “Injunction Area”. 52. In addition to above, from the Council’s internal case management system, Mr. Williams details: a. After the injunction: in the period of April 2019 to January 2024, there were a total of 35 unauthorised encampments, 18 of which were within the injunction area and 17 of which were outside. That equates to 51% of encampments being in the injunction area. Of those 18 encampments in the injunction area, 17 were removed with the assistance of the injunction granted by HHJ Dight CBE (sitting as a Judge of the High Court). One encampment left voluntarily on the same day as it arrived (7 June 2021) without the need for intervention. b. In the period February to December 2024 there were a total of 17 unauthorised encampments, of which one was within the injunction area. c. the number of unauthorised encampments in the Borough generally and the injunction area specifically have reduced significantly; d. the duration of stay of an unauthorised encampment in the injunction area has reduced significantly; e. the duration of stay of an unauthorised encampment in the injunction area is significantly lower than it is for encampments outside of the injunction area; f. there are two encampments which are formed by those travelling through the Borough, there has been an equal division of encampments within in and outside of the injunction area in 2024. g. If the injunction is not made there is a likelihood that those forming unauthorised encampments in neighbouring Boroughs will migrate to the Injunction area and the harms suffered prior to the granting of injunctive relief will resume.
Draft 31 March 2025 12:22
Page 16
56
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator