Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background

Enfield London Borough Council v Persons Unknown: Applications for retrospective permission

Justine Soutter looks at the important implications a recent case involving a London borough may have for other local authorities dealing with fly tipping and unauthorised encampments.

In London Borough of Enfield v Persons Unknown & Ors [2020] EWHC 2717 (QB) the High Court has refused an application to give a local authority retrospective permission to serve a claim form in order to obtain an injunction to prevent persons unknown from setting up encampments or fly-tipping on public open spaces in its borough.

Facts of the Case

Enfield Borough Council applied for an injunction against persons unknown to stop them from setting up encampments or fly-tipping on various public open spaces in the borough.

Article continues below...

An interim injunction was granted and notice of the injunction was attached to posts at each of the sites, however, copies of the claim form were not. The notice stated that the claim form was available on Enfield London Borough Council’s website and in libraries.

When the injunction was due to expire, Enfield London Borough Council applied to the court for retrospective permission to serve the claim form by an alternative method and issued a claim for a new injunction.

Evidence was provided by Enfield that the claim form had been viewed 2068 times on its website. Evidence was also provided by an organisation known as London Gypsies and Travellers that the gypsy and traveller community tended to have less access to the internet than the general public.

Change in circumstances

The court found that there had been a duty on the local authority, having obtained the injunction against persons unknown without notice, to restore the matter to the court for reconsideration as there had been a material change in circumstances against the backdrop of the Court of Appeal’s decision in Canada Goose UK Retail Limited .v. Persons Unknown.

Had the local authority done so, the Court would have required service by posting the claim form at each site. In the circumstances, the court held that it would not make an order under CPR 6.15(2) allowing alternative service in respect of an injunction against persons unknown.


So what does this mean for your local authority? When applying for injunctions against persons unknown, care needs to be taken to ensure that all  documents are served at the relevant sites.

Justine Soutter is Head of Dispute Resolution and Employment at Invicta Law. She can be contacted This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..


Sponsored Editorial

  • Three things to think about when you’re re-mortgaging your home

    Sarah Deacon, Area Manager for Wesleyan Financial Services (WFS) who specialises in providing financial advice to lawyers, explains the top three things to consider when you’re planning to re-mortgage your home.
  • Sheriffs Office Hi res

    High Court enforcement for Local Authorities

    High Court enforcement services can be useful for local authorities in several circumstances. The Sheriff's Office outlines the main circumstances when local authorities may need to use enforcement services and the procedures they will need to follow when they do.
Slide background