Judgment out: Elliott's appeal against HS2 allowed on sentence, halved from 6 to 3 months (suspended) because judge's starting point was too high and did not properly take into account the "Cuadrilla discount" for people engaged in civil disobedience bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/…
Disappointed other grounds (boundaries & knowledge of order) refused but important Court of Appeal cemented principle that non-violent protesters treated more leniently in sentencing.
Also credit to @Kirsty_Brimelow (leading me and Richard Brigden) for establishing the "Cuadrilla principle" in that other important Court of Appeal case from last year - including a quote from John Rawls who I think was the philosopher who led me into law bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/…
Also this is a case where HS2 began from a position of seeking the immediate imprisonment of a protester - after some very hard fought hearings, half of the allegations (including the most serious) were dismissed and he ultimately has a 3-month suspended sentence.
Oh go on then I'll take a compliment from the Court of Appeal, even if in the context of dismissing an argument!
The right to protest is the lifeblood of democracy.
During this deadly pandemic, every aspect of our social lives has been affected, and it is right that a deadly infectious virus will make us protest differently, as it makes us work and socialise differently.
At 3pm today every police force in England was saying protest could never be lawful under Covid regs.
The position now, because of the ruling, is protest can in principle be lawful and it is up to the police to assess the proportionality
The only reason judge didn't make declaration we wanted (that the right to protest has to be part of every decision made by police re protest) is the police conceded the point just before the hearing, contrary to their policy which we had and also their statements to our clients.
Absolutely amazing effort by @ReclaimTS - we are lucky to have such amazing publicly minded women in our society.
The organisers could face £10k fines, and participants could be prosecuted or face fines of £100s.
@metpoliceuk initially told @ReclaimTS organisers they wanted to allow it to happen but late this afternoon reversed their position and said that their "hands were tied" /2
A great team at @BindmansLLP@BlackstoneChbrs@DoughtyStreet and I are working to get urgent hearing before High Court tomorrow to declare Met Police misunderstood their duties under Human Rights Act.
Interested to see how the @metpoliceuk police this. In the current lockdown they seem to have been treating protest as essentially banned. I think that is legally wrong. Outdoor socially distanced protest should be permitted under the Covid regulations.
In the circumstances, the @metpoliceuk should confirm publicly that the protest will be permitted. However, if they do, it will be an exception to the policy they seem to have applied through the rest of the lockdown. This shows the problem with the policy.
The police should never be in the position of deciding which causes they prefer to permit to protest. Anyway, watch this space for more on that
First important change - to the face covering regulations.
Basically trying to prevent face covering rules being “exercised so as to prevent a voter who is otherwise entitled to vote… from doing so”. What does that mean, exactly?