MR JUSTICE NICKLIN Approved Judgment
MBR Acres Ltd -v- Curtin
to the claim. Following the imposition of the Exclusion Zone in the Interim Injunction granted 10 November 2021, the location at which the relevant documents were to be displayed was moved to a noticeboard opposite the entrance of the Wyton Site. F: The claims advanced by the Claimants 57. As a result of some narrowing down of the Claimants’ focus during the trial, the claims finally advanced by the Claimants against Mr Curtin and the “Persons Unknown” Defendants at the conclusion of the trial were: (1) trespass (including alleged trespass as a result of the flying of drones over the Wyton Site); (2) public nuisance on the highway; and (3) interference with the First Claimant’s common law right of access to the highway from the Wyton Site. Although the Claimants had included a claim for harassment against both Mr Curtin and Persons Unknown, that claim was only pursued against Mr Curtin at the end of the trial. It was not pursued as a basis for the grant of relief against Persons Unknown. It is appropriate here to analyse the causes of action relied upon by the Claimants. (1) Trespass (a) Physical encroachment onto the Wyton Site 58. This claim is straightforward. 59. Trespass to land is the interference with possession or the right to possession of land. It includes instances in which a person intrudes upon the land of another without legal justification. The key features of trespass are: (1) it is a strict liability tort: a defendant need not know that s/he is committing a trespass to be liable; (2) the tort is actionable without proof of damage; and (3) the extent of the trespass is irrelevant to liability: Ellis -v- Loftus Iron Company (1874-75) LR 10 CP 10, 12 : “… if the defendant place a part of his foot on the plaintiff’s land unlawfully, it is in law as much a trespass as if he had walked half a mile on it. ” 60. A person does not commit a trespass where s/he enters upon, or remains on the land, if s/he has permission (or licence). That permission (or licence) can be express or implied. 61. However, a person who enters land pursuant to a licence, but who proceeds to act in such a way that in exceeds the scope of that licence, or who remains on the land after the expiration of the licence, commits a trespass: Hillen -v- ICI (Alkali) Ltd [1936] AC 65, 69 ; Jockey Club Racecourse Limited -v- Persons Unknown [2019] EWHC 1026 (Ch) [15]. (b) Trespass to the airspace above the Wyton Site 62. This claim is not straightforward.
85
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator