Injunction blocking unauthorised work at wildlife spot extended at High Court
Works took place at the site last month without planning permission.
People who used diggers to carry out unauthorised work on a wildlife spot have been further prevented from continuing work after an injunction was extended at the High Court.
East Herts Council previously secured an injunction to prevent work taking place on land off Sheering Mill Lane in Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, which forms part of the green belt and is “particularly environmentally sensitive”.
It followed works taking place at the site without planning permission last month, which led to villagers forming a peaceful protest.
Those carrying out the work left the site over the bank holiday weekend after an injunction was issued by the High Court which gave police the power to arrest those who breached it.
On Tuesday, barristers for the council asked for the injunction to be extended until a full trial of the legal claim.
Michael Fry, for the local authority, also said the case was “one of those extraordinary and vanishingly rare cases” where the court should continue to give police the power to arrest those who breach the injunction.
Mr Justice Lavender granted the extension and continued the power of arrest, stating: “The evidence of the police is that it is only the power of arrest that has enabled planning control to be enforced in this case.”
The injunction is against “persons unknown carrying out, encouraging and/or facilitating development on, or with an intent to undertake development” on the land, and those “occupying or intending to occupy” the land, as well as some named individuals.
No one appeared in court to oppose the ban being continued.
In written submissions, Mr Fry said that work began on the land in late August but a temporary stop notice was ignored.
An initial High Court injunction, which did not give police the power to arrest those who breached it, was also unsuccessful in halting the work.
A second injunction granting the power of arrest was issued on August 30th, which Mr Fry said had “absolutely abated” work being carried out.
The barrister told the court that the authority did not know the identities of who had moved onto the land, but it “assumed” that they “are members of the gypsy and travelling community”.
He acknowledged that the council “accepts that it cannot currently demonstrate a five-year supply of pitches” for travellers, but that it was “seeking to address the shortfall” and there was some evidence that those previously on the site were of a “wide range of ethnicities”.
He also said that the fact that travellers “require somewhere to live not on the roadside” did not “excuse or permit the activities which have been undertaken” on the site, and that the injunction was “necessary and proportionate”.
The barrister also said that there had been breaches of planning rules on the land which “have involved, and are likely to involve, conduct which was and would be a public nuisance” as part of “a prospective change of use from open space to, it is presumed, residential caravan site”.
The work carried out on the site included removing vegetation, installing drainage, erecting fencing and gates, and bringing “caravans, mobile homes, plant and heavy machinery, including multiple excavators, dump trucks and a ground roller” onto the site.
Mr Fry said the injunction should be continued as “the unauthorised works which were undertaken without planning permission have resulted in significant harms, significant local disruption and widespread concern”.