51. Thus they are, as I have indicated, described by reference to geographical locations where the interference might take place, largely coinciding with those that I have already read into this order when I described the terms of the injunction. The exception is, I think, is the category of the eight Defendants, which is: “P ersons Unknown intentionally endangering any person at the location described below as the “ Epsom Racecourse ” . ” 52. Mr Maclean has assisted me through the law in relation to the joinder of Persons Unknown in proceedings and the making of injunctions against them. He has pointed out that there are three recent cases which have clarified the law. They are Boyd v Ineos Upstream Ltd & Persons Unknown [2019] 4 WLR 100, Canada Goose UK Retail Limited v Persons Unknown [2020] 1 WLR 2802 and Cuadrilla Bowland Limited & Ors v Persons Unknown [2020] 4 WLR 29. There is, in addition, Barking and Dagenham v Persons Unknown [2023] QB 295,but it is unnecessary to dwell upon that. 53. The jurisprudence considers at some length the rights and limits to joining Persons Unknown and claiming relief (and in particular injunctive relief) against them. I do not need to go into that jurisprudence in depth. I can confine myself to the following. 54. In Canada Goose at paragraph 82, which is after the decision in the Ineos case, the Court of Appeal have set out the various procedural guidelines applicable to proceedings for interim relief against Persons Unknown in protester cases, such as the one before the Court. The Court set out the following:
“82) Building on Cameron and the Ineos requirements, it is now possible to set out the following procedural guidelines applicable to proceedings for interim relief against "persons unknown" in protester cases like the present one: (1) The "persons unknown" Defendants in the claim form are, by definition, people who have not been identified at the time of the commencement of the proceedings. If they are known and have been identified, they must be joined as individual defendants to the proceedings. The "persons unknown" Defendants must be people who have not been identified but are capable of being identified and served with the proceedings, if necessary by alternative service such as can reasonably be expected to bring the proceedings to their attention. In principle, such persons include both anonymous defendants who are identifiable at the time the proceedings commence but whose names are unknown and also Newcomers, that is to say people who in the future will join the protest and fall within the description of the "persons unknown". (2) The "persons unknown" must be defined in the originating process by reference to their conduct which is alleged to be unlawful. (3) Interim injunctive relief may only be granted if there is a sufficiently real and imminent risk of a tort being committed to justify quia timet relief. (4) As in the case of the originating process itself, the Defendants subject to the interim injunction must be individually named if known and
Page 9 of 12
11
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online