Nico Hines and Michael Herman
Win a fitness package worth more than £3,000

Heathrow operator BAA won a partial High Court victory today in its quest to impede an environmental protest at the airport, but the ruling was nothing like as wide-ranging as the company had hoped.
Mrs Justice Swift conceded that an injunction was needed to prevent the potentially “serious and damaging” consequences of the anti-climate change protest, but ensured that peaceful protesters would be able to demonstrate at the airport.
The judge dismissed BAA’s suggestion that up to five million members of groups including the National Trust and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds should be included in the injunction. Instead, only the group Plane Stupid was named in the court order.
The number of groups requested by BAA has been slashed by the judge, as has the geographical scope of the injunction, which could have covered the London Underground and motorway approaches to the airport.
John Stewart, one of the leading campaigners, claimed victory for the protest groups who say the Camp for Climate Action will go ahead.
“BAA had asked for the mother of all injunctions. They have received the mother of all setbacks,” said Mr Stewart, the chairman of Heathrow airport anti-noise group Hacan and also chairman of the umbrella body AirportWatch.
The court case has created a wave of publicity, as some groups accused BAA of taking a heavy-handed approach to the protest camp that will be held at Heathrow between August 14 and 21.
The company’s application named Plane Stupid, Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise, Airportwatch and No Third Runway as the organisations to be included in the injunction.
Airportwatch is an umbrella organisation supported by groups with five million members, including the National Trust, the RSPB, the Woodland Trust, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and the Campaign to Protect Rural England.
The judge opened the hearing by declaring her own interest in the case. She is an active member of the RSPB, a benefactor of the National Trust and a member of the CPRE. BAA's solicitor said he had no objection to her hearing the case.
Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, accused BAA bosses of being "out of their skull" by effectively inciting radical protesters to join the otherwise peaceful camp.
The judge accepted that there was a risk that “a terrorist group may use the disruption caused by the protesters to perpetrate a terrorist act”.
But concluded that a relatively lenient injunction would suffice: “I am satisfied that the terms of this injunction are no wider than necessary to provide proper and effective protection to the claimants.”
As well as limiting the terms of the injunction, the judge ordered BAA to pay the costs incurred by the protest groups at the hearing.
Mrs Justice Swift also awarded costs to be paid by BAA to Transport for London and London Underground. The organisations attended proceedings after finding out that the airport authority had planned to make Underground stations part of the injunction, without informing them. The judge said it was “extraordinary” that they had not been consulted.
BAA denied that it had attempted to prevent millions of people using the roads and public transport around Europe’s busiest airport.
Tim Lawson-Cruttenden, BAA's solicitor said: "We are only injuncting those who wish to act unlawfully. There is nothing to stop anyone from coming to the airport if they wish to act lawfully."
The members of Plane Stupid and three named protesters will be arrested for contempt of court if the authorities believe they are about to breach the court order issued today.
Joss Garman and Leo Murray, both of Plane Stupid and Mr Stewart, the three protest leaders in the injunction, had already agreed with BAA that they would not breach any of the conditions, which have now been set out in the court order.
Anyone who breaks the injunction, or helps any of the defendants to breach its terms, faces action for contempt of court and may be imprisoned, fined or have their assets seized.
Protesters from Plane Stupid are banned from preventing anyone coming or going from the airport or “disrupting the operation of Heathrow Airport”.
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2006
£10,750
Great car insurance deals online
£Excellent+ executive benefits
Torres and Partners
London
£49,229 - £62,035 pro rata
Charity Commission
London/Liverpool/Taunton
Alstom Power
Europe
Six Figure
Rolls Royce
Midlands/Europe
From £89,950
Great Investment, River Views
Special Offers now available
New Year in the USA!
.
Cruise the Islands of Hawaii - Pride of America
List your property with two leading travel websites
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths
News International associated websites: Globrix | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Will this protest make more people sit up and listen - those that are sitting in their armchairs watching TV about the Third Runway saying well of course we have to progress.
Will you be saying this when your home is with threat of being demolished? Until it affects them then naturally they wont.
For all those that do not and have never seen what BAA want to wipe out, I say come and have a look, come and see the history surrounding these villages. Come and see the Churchyard that may become a little island on the site of a runway. Or maybe be there when a decision is taken to move graves of loved ones. Again unless it directly affects you how can you make judgement on those fighting for a cause.
Once BAA have a third runway, it will then become a fourth and so on, do you live far enough away to not be in the pathway of the Concrete jungle?
Think hard, put yourself in the same situation as the thousands of people this is going to affect, the number will grow will you be one of those
S.Harris, Harmondsworth Village,
BAA is not doing itself any favours. At the current Stansted Airport public inquiry, we hear regularly how BAA has failed to provide enough information, required information, or minimised what it assesses the impacts upon. Last Monday, the FT ran a lead article on the concerns which the City of London has about Heathrow Airport's quality of service and general chaos. At Stansted, BAA has disputed how much to pay the police with the result that it seems under-resourced. Now the Competition Commission is about to release the first stages of its inquiry into BAA's monopoly. How can a high profile company make so many faux pas?
DM Bryce, CHelmsford, England
"injunct"? Whatever happened to "enjoin"? Are lawyers, whose profession is based on purported precision of language, becoming so ill-educated that they are ignorant of the root verb of "injunction"?
Cec Hogarth, Buena Vista, CO, USA
Shouldn't we all reduce our emissions of global warming hysteria! The airline industry has become a convenient scapegoat for all those jumping on the climate change bandwagon.
Given that aeroplanes only produces a small amount of all man made CO2 and that man made CO2 is only a small part of total greehouse gases, one can only conclude that the protestors have other agenda's and that climate change is simply being used as a cover for these.
If they are really serious about climate change then how about tackling the enormous waste of energy in our society that surely contributes far more to CO2 emissions.
Andrew Brown, Derby, UK
Three cheers for the good Justice.
Bob Hall, New York, United States
I think theses climate protesters are fantastic, how much pollution is going to be created by a few thousand people all making tracks for Heathrow? Very much a case of borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.
They are nasty, self minded people who instead of making their complaints heard by the relevant people, feel more obliged to try and disrupt the lives of law abiding citizens, many of whom will have worked hard all year in order to be able to afford a few days or weeks away from it all. What good will they get from harassing the unknown citizen?
A Thorn, London,
Although usually a staunch supporter of the right to protest, this was a tricky one from the word go. In the light of an ongoing terrorist threat against this country, the Camp for Climate protest would have made the jobs of security personnel at Heathrow virtually impossible. Regretfully, I believe that the High Court decision was fully justified under the prevailing circumstances.
Nicholas Lee, Windsor, UK