An injunction had been granted to restrain Bovis from causing a noise nuisance outside certain hours specified in a notice served by the council under the 1974 Act which created a criminal offence ‘without reasonable excuse’ to contravene the notice. A number of informations were laid against Bovis but they were adjourned and the injunction was sought in the meantime. Bovis appealed contending that an injunction should not be granted unless it was first established that the defendant had committed an offence and that the defendant was deliberately and flagrantly flouting the law, neither of which could be established.
Held: The appeal failed. The court considered the circumstances in which a local authority might seek an injunction to support its attempt to enforce legislation. The guiding principles are: ‘(1) that the jurisdiction is to be invoked and exercised exceptionally and with great caution . .
(2) that there must certainly be something more than mere infringement of the criminal law before the assistance of civil proceedings can be invoked and accorded for the protection or promotion of the interests of the inhabitants of the area . .
(3) that the essential foundation for the exercise of the court’s discretion to grant an injunction is not that the offender is deliberately and flagrantly flouting the law but the need to draw the inference that the defendant’s unlawful operations will continue unless and until effectively restrained by the law and that nothing short of an injunction will be effective to restrain them. . . ‘
Judges:
Bingham LJ
Citations:
[1992] 3 All ER 697
Statutes:
Control of Pollution Act 1974 60
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Attorney General v Chaudry CA 1971
The court has jurisdiction to grant a civil law remedy by way of injunction in order to enforce the public law, except in cases where statute had expressly or by necessary implication removed the jurisdiction. Whenever Parliament has enacted a law . .
Cited – Kent County Council v Batchelor 1979
. .
Cited – Runnymede Borough Council v Ball CA 1986
An injunction was granted to restrain a nuisance because of a threat of irreversible damage. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Guildford Borough Council v Hein CA 27-Jul-2005
The council sought an injunction under the section against the defendant to restrain her from keeping dogs on her premises for animal welfare purposes.
Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed in part. There had to be shown something more than . .
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Shafi and Another CA 30-Oct-2008
The Council appealed a finding that the court did not have jurisdiction to obtain without notice injunctions to control the behaviour of youths said to be creating a disturbance, including restricting their rights to enter certain parts of the city . .
Cited – Hall and Others v Mayor of London (on Behalf of The Greater London Authority) CA 16-Jul-2010
The appellants sought leave to appeal against an order for possession of Parliament Square on which the claimants had been conducting a demonstration (‘the Democracy Village’).
Held: Leave was refused save for two appellants whose cases were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Local Government
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.231653