header-logo header-logo

27 March 2026
Issue: 8155 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 27 March 2026

Contempt

Birmingham City Council v Unite the Union [2026] EWHC 633 (KB)

The King’s Bench Division determined the appropriate penalty for Unite’s admitted breach of a prohibitory injunction granted on 23 May 2025 concerning picketing during a Birmingham rubbish collection strike. Birmingham City Council (BCC) sought a financial penalty for Unite’s contempt of court. The key issue was the appropriate sanction for breaches occurring between 8 and 21 July 2025, where Unite members obstructed waste collection vehicles on roads away from depot entrances, outside designated assembly areas. Unite admitted the breaches but argued they resulted from a genuine misunderstanding of the injunction’s scope, contending it only prohibited protesting at depot premises, not elsewhere. The court rejected this defence, finding the breaches deliberate with high culpability. The court held that Unite’s interpretation was not genuinely held but rather a spurious argument to circumvent the injunction’s clear terms. The injunction’s purpose was manifestly to prevent impediment to rubbish collection, which necessarily extended beyond merely allowing vehicles to exit depots. The court found Unite

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll