Can you get an injunction to prevent someone you don’t know from doing something they might not do?
This was a question that was recently considered by the High Court in London.
Background
“O Captain! My Captain!”
Walt Whitman (1819-1892)
In scenes not dissimilar to something from the Dead Poets Society (1989), a group of students barricaded themselves into 8th-floor offices (‘the Premises’) at the University of Brighton “…to protest against the possibility of redundancies taking place amongst staff”.
An interim injunction had previously been granted requiring Persons Unknown to vacate the Premises, which they eventually did.
The University applied for a final quia timet injunction.
Judgment
A quia timet (‘since he fears’) injunction is one granted to prevent the occurrence of an actionable wrong or to prevent repetition of an actionable wrong in the future.”
The Court of Appeal previously identified six principles to be applied before such an injunction should be granted against persons unknown. Noting that “[n]o one has attended for Persons Unknown”, Mr Justice Constable then applied these six principles to the instant case:
- Sufficiently real and immediate risk
The risk of the protesters returning was a “strong possibility” or a “sufficiently real and immediate risk”.
- Impossible to name
It was plainly “impossible to name the persons… likely to commit the tort unless restrained.
- Possible to give notice
It was, however, possible “to give effective notice of the injunction”.
- Terms correspond to threat and 5. Sufficiently clear and precise
The injunction sought was limited to “preventing Persons Unknown occupying the Premises”. This would not prevent any student from entering for ‘legitimate’ purposes.
- Clear limits
The Premises were defined. A time limit of 6 months was included.
Given the circumstances of the current case, the court also considered a seventh “essential element”:
- Gravity of likely harm
The harm resulting would “be so grave and irreparable” that a remedy in damages would be inadequate.
Conclusion
A Final Injunction was granted against Persons Unknown.
For more information on this article or any other aspect of commercial litigation and dispute resolution, contact your Napthens Solicitors in Liverpool, Blackburn, Preston and across the North West today.
FAQs
What is a Quia Timet injunction?
A Quia Timet injunction allows a future potential wrong from occurring. Meaning ‘because he fears’, this type of injunction anticipates wrongdoing where the future action will infringe upon their rights.
An example could be when a neighbour is about to build a fence encroaching on your property, or where a river is being rapidly polluted to the extent that it will likely reach level that cause damage.
Who qualifies as a ‘person unknown’?
‘Persons unknown’ are those whose identities are not known at the time of taking legal action. It might be for example that a group of protestors are organising to trespass your land to demonstrate.
Can you sue someone you don’t know?
Yes, you can sue someone you don’t know, but only in certain circumstances. You need to show that there is a real risk of harm, that the person or group against which legal action is being taken is clearly defined and that identifying the individual/s is difficult with reasonable efforts taken.
Who can apply for a Quia Timet injuction?
Any person or entity can technically apply for a quia timet injunction against persons unknown, but must be able to demonstrate a real or imminent threat of harm. Therefore, it’s most common that a quai timet injunction is sought by:
- Landowners
- Companies
- Educational Institutions
- Local Authorities
David Bailey | Partner, Head of Litigation
David Bailey is a partner and heads up the litigation team, based in the firm's Preston and Liverpool offices.
Related Insights
Sign up for legal insights
Stay up to date with the latest alerts, training and event invitations.
