We're grassroots Heathrow residents proving that communities less dependent on oil can be more resilient, stronger and happier. We take direct action on climate change and shrinking supplies of cheap energy by transitioning to a post-oil, community-led future for the Heathrow villages.

Judgement at the Royal Courts of Justice

Posted: June 29th, 2017 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | No Comments »

 

Grow Heathrow were given 14 days to leave their home today at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Judge Dight granted the possession order to landowners Lewdown Holdings, whilst citing the “hardship and difficulty caused” and the “logistical difficulties which will be caused by the fact that the effect of such an order would be to require the eviction of an entire settled community”.

The judge acknowledged the two named defendants spoke “strongly and eloquently about the constructive nature of the Grow Heathrow community and its achievements but also about the negative impact on the community and its aims if a possession order were to be made”, before awarding costs against both Ru Raynor and Eddy Thacker of at least £23,781 between them.

The Judge acknowledged “the very considerable time, effort and, no doubt, expense which the Defendants have invested in making the Property into a thriving community, all of which has been carried out with the best of intentions, in furtherance of the committed principles of Grow Heathrow” whilst explaining that neither this nor ‘the genuine support of the local community” met the “exceptional” circumstances required by the defendants.   Grow Heathrow’s defence relied on the right to a home, as interpreted under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998, to resist a possession order. Grow Heathrow argued that any possession order would infringe the freedom of expression (under Article 10) and freedom of assembly, protest and association (under Article 11).   The Judge found that the defendants could not rely on these rights to override Article 1, that “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions”. The judge stated that a “private landowner [is] entitled to put its land to any form of lawful use, including doing nothing with it.” He further explained that “The Claimant has no need to justify the holding and alleged failure to use the land.”


Leave a Reply