header-logo header-logo

20 September 2007 / Tim Lawson-Cruttenden , Lacie Kerner
Issue: 7289 / Categories: Features , Environment
printer mail-detail

Airport watch

BAA was a misunderstood and misrepresented injunction, say Tim Lawson-Cruttenden and Lacie Kerner

On 6 August 2007 in Heathrow Airport Ltd and others v Garman and others [2007] All ER (D) 28 (Aug), the High Court granted Heathrow Airport Ltd (HAL) an injunction, the purpose of which was to restrain any unlawful and/or tortious activity directed by environmental activists during the course of the Camp for Climate Action 2007 (CfCA 2007) which took place between 14 and 21 August 2007. The injunction took effect from midnight on 7 August 2007 and expired at midnight on 31 August 2007.

HAL’s application was controversial and was the subject of vitriolic criticism by London mayor Ken Livingstone, who made uncomplimentary remarks about the Spanish firm Ferrovial, likening it to the Franco regime. The media portrayed the application as illiberal and repressive, and claimed that HAL was seeking to prevent up to six million individuals from visiting the airport during August 2007. The media frenzy generated by the application sought to criticise HAL and the BAA management for

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll