Court upholds 5-year ASBO preventing harassment of local authority employees

The Administrative Court has upheld an anti-social behaviour order prohibiting a man from engaging in any behavior likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to any of a local authority's employees for five years.

Handing down the ASBO, a judge had found that the appellant had made verbal attacks on people associated with North Lincolnshire Council. Allegations of serious impropriety had been made and one had been threatened with violence.

North Lincolnshire also obtained a costs order of £16,984 against the appellant.

The appellant – described as a “passionate politicial activist” – submitted to the Administrative Court amongst other things that:

1. The judge had used the wrong standard of proof in deciding the matter, namely the civil rather than criminal standard of proof, and that he had not been entitled to find on the facts that the appellant's behavior amounted to anti-social behaviour;

2. The ASBO was not necessary and proportionate, its terms were so wide so as to offend legal certainty, five years was too long, and the judge had not considered the least restrictive means of achieving the legitimate aim.

Lord Justice Lloyd Jones and Mr Justice Supperstone rejected the appeal. (The Lawtel case report can be found here on the Kings Chambers website)

They found that there had been no basis for concluding that the judge had failed to apply the criminal standard of proof. The appellant’s conduct had also been persistent and serious enough to justify making an ASBO.

The Administrative Court added that the judge had been entitled to make the ASBO for the protection of the public. The effect of the order did not infringe the appellant's right to share opinions on political matters, or to attend local authority meetings.

The court also said it was important that local authority employees could carry out their functions without being subjected to threatening behaviour. The judge had also been entitled to find that the only way of protecting them from harassment was to encompass all local authority members and employees.

The judges therefore conclude that the ASBO was necessary and proportionate. As for the duration, five years had not been unnecessary, unreasonable or disproportionate.

Sam Skinner of Kings Chambers, who appeared for the appellant, said his client had appealed on a point of law against the imposition of an ASBO arising out of behaviour he considered to be political protest surrounding the conduct of a local authority. “This is a significant decision made by a Divisional Court when dismissing the appeal, about the lawful extent of the prohibition on political protest when it is carried out in a way that amounts to harassment.”

Nicholas Mason appeared for North Lincolnshire.