In Canary Wharf Investments Ltd & Others v Brewer and Others (23/02/2018), interim injunctions were granted to prevent “urban explorers” trespassing on the Canary Wharf estate where they had been climbing on buildings, cranes and accessing restricted areas.
The six named defendants were “urban explorers” who climbed buildings and cranes in the area and posted pictures and videos on social media. The claimant was responsible for the Canary Wharf estate in London.
The claimant sought an interim injunction against the six named defendants and also other unnamed parties who had been engaging in similar activities.
In granting the injunction against the six named defenadants, the Court noted:
– A landowner was entitled to stop trespass even if no harm had been caused
– The defendants recognised that they did not have a legal right to trespass on the claimants’ land.
– There was ample evidence to show that without an injunction the defendants would continue to trespass on the land.
In deciding whether to grant an injunction against unnamed individuals, the court had to consider whether the terms of the injunction were framed in a way that it would only catch unnamed persons engaging in the unlawful conduct it sought to prevent. The court was satisfied that the injunction was sufficiently targeted and granted the relief being sought.
The Court also made certain orders regarding the delivery up of photos and videos of the “urban explorers” in action that had been posted on social media.