header-logo header-logo

20 November 2014 / Tim Lawson-Cruttenden
Issue: 7631 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Persons unknown

Tim Lawson-Cruttenden examines the evolution of claims against unnamed defendants in non-land law cases

On 8 October Mrs Justice McGowan ordered injunctive relief in Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd v (1) Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty and (2) Persons Unknown [2014] EWHC 3429 (QB).

The injunction is intended to protect the employees of Novartis, an international pharmaceutical company, against harassment by animal rights activists. Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, whose membership is unknown and deliberately anonymous, were joined into the action using the representative mechanism under CPR 19.6. This mechanism enables unincorporated associations to be sued through a named individual. However, the making of orders against “persons unknown” was thought to be sufficiently innovative for the High Court to seek a review of this developing area of the law which has thus far had little supervision from the Court of Appeal.

The purpose of this article, in relation to the joining in as defendants of persons unknown, is to consider:

  1. the historical law up to 2003;
  2. recent developments since 2003;
  3. the effect of the Novartis decision; and
  4. the impact
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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll