Basingstoke council wins court ban on illegal encampments
A council has successfully applied for a court order which bans members of Gypsy and traveller communities from camping in part of its area.Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council, in Hampshire, was granted a one-year renewal of a High Court injunction.Previous bans have greatly reduced unlawful encampments in the area, while neighbouring boroughs without injunctions have seen an increase, the court was told.However, Kirsty Brimelow KC, sitting as a deputy judge, said the borough was not meeting the needs of Gypsies and travellers and should reconsider a decision not to provide them with a transit site.
In her written judgement, Ms Brimelow said: "A transit site would satisfy anxiety of Gypsies and travellers that they might be moved from whenever they stop in the borough."The injunction, lasting until 3 April 2026, was granted against "persons unknown", who were not represented in court.It covers the town of Basingstoke, as well as rural areas around Bramley, Silchester and Tadley Common.Previous injunctions in Basingstoke and also in Test Valley have deterred encampments and gave police enhanced powers of arrest, the court was told.However, in neighbouring areas without injunctions, the problem had escalated, the judge heard.Reading in Berkshire currently had 59 unauthorised encampments, police told the court.Giving evidence, Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council said it feared the return of previous problems involving untreated human faeces in fields, intimidation of residents, noise and financial harm.It acknowledged that anti-social behaviour was not representative of the Gypsy and traveller community.The authority said it was updating its local plan, calling for new sites.In September 2024, the borough approved a "negotiated stopping policy", tolerating encampments on council-owned land on a case-by-case basis.Ms Brimelow renewed the injunction, covering 10% of the borough where encampments would be "especially harmful".
You can follow BBC Hampshire & Isle of Wight on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
19 hours ago
- Daily Mail
School fees blow as judges reject challenge to Labour tax - even though they say it's discriminatory
Private school families lost their challenge to Labour 's tax on fees yesterday – but judges still branded the measure 'discriminatory'. The judgment by the High Court said the 20 per cent VAT would have a 'disproportionately prejudicial effect' on pupils with special needs. However, it also ruled Parliament still had the right to impose such a decision. Yesterday, the Boarding Schools Association said it was a 'sad day' for vulnerable pupils, adding: 'There are no winners here.' At least one of the claimants now plans to appeal. Paul Conrathe, solicitor at SinclairsLaw which represented a group of special educational needs parents, Education Not Discrimination, said 'the Government should hang its head in shame'. There was anger over the Government's insistence during the case that the tax would benefit state schools. This week it suggested that the money will now pay for housing. VAT on school fees was introduced on January 1, having been pledged in Labour's manifesto. The claim against it was brought by three groups of families and some private schools. They aimed to have the tax declared 'incompatible' with human rights laws. Yesterday's judgment, by Dame Victoria Sharp, Lord Justice Newey and Mr Justice Chamberlain, agreed that the tax was 'discriminatory' against pupils with special educational needs. It also interfered with their right to an education under the European Convention on Human Rights, they said. 'If the imposition of VAT makes the fees unaffordable, there is a significant risk that the state school to which they transfer will not provide adequately for their needs,' they added. 'The measure will have a disproportionately prejudicial effect on them.' However, they concluded Parliament had a 'broad margin of discretion in deciding how to balance the interests of those adversely affected against the interests of others who may gain from public provision funded by the money it will raise'. Many parents of special educational needs children pay fees because private schools offer better pastoral care. The Government said the court had confirmed its legislation was 'compatible with its human rights obligations'.
Belfast Telegraph
19 hours ago
- Belfast Telegraph
BBC confirms corporation will not appeal Gerry Adams libel ruling after it adds update to online article
It comes after the broadcaster updated an online article at the heart of the controversy, urging readers to be aware of the outcome of the case which found that the former Sinn Fein leader had been defamed. Mr Adams took the BBC to court over a Spotlight episode which aired in 2016 and the accompanying online article based on the programme. In a high-profile case, a jury concluded the content defamed Mr Adams (76) by featuring an anonymous source who alleged he sanctioned the 2006 murder of British agent Denis Donaldson who was also a high-ranking Sinn Fein official. This evening the BBC said: 'We have given careful consideration to the jury's decision. 'We will not be appealing its verdict, bringing this matter to a conclusion. We remain committed to public interest journalism and to serving all BBC audiences.' The verdict was delivered in the High Court in Dublin last month along with the decision to award the successful claimant €100,000 (£84,000). Jurors determined that the allegation — which Mr Adams has always denied — in the programme and online story was damaging to Mr Adams' reputation. The jury concluded that the BBC did not act in good faith nor in a fair and reasonable way. The corporation was then ordered to pay Mr Adams' legal costs. The combined bill for both parties is estimated to be between €3-5m (£2.5-4.2m), according to sources with knowledge of the case. Speaking tonight, Mr Adams said the decision should be accompanied with 'a substantial reform' of the BBC's internal journalistic processes along with an acknowledgement that 'it cannot continue to be a voice for the British state in Ireland'. 'It must also become more accountable to the public,' he continued in a statement. 'There is an onus on the BBC to ensure that in the future its ethics and journalism reflect the principles and values of a public broadcast service. 'As I have already said the damages will be donated to good causes.' The offending online article remains on the BBC News website, however an update has been added. The update, alongside a link to reporting of the defamation case, states: 'In 2017 Gerry Adams commenced defamation proceedings in the Republic of Ireland against the BBC in respect of the article below and the BBC programme 'Spy in the IRA' upon which the article is based. 'In May 2025 a jury in the High Court in Dublin, Ireland, found in favour of Mr Adams and awarded him €100,000 (£84,000) in damages. 'A link to the BBC's reporting of the outcome of Gerry Adams' libel case, which should be read in conjunction with this update, is here.' It comes after the Taoiseach promised that defamation laws in the Republic will be changed as quickly as the Irish Government can achieve it. Earlier this week Micheal Martin praised the BBC reporter at the centre of the case, Jennifer O'Leary, as 'first-class'. 'I think the defamation laws need to be changed — we're going to change them,' he said. The Taoiseach vowed that the Government in Dublin would pass the legislation 'as quickly as we can' adding: 'I think we do need to get it through to create a balanced environment for commentary and for investigative journalism'. BBC NI director Adam Smyth previously warned of 'profound' implications of libel action as he expressed disappointment over the outcome. 'As our legal team made clear, if the BBC's case cannot be won under existing Irish defamation law, it's hard to see how anyone's could — and they warned that today's decision could hinder freedom of expression,' he said after the verdict. Meanwhile Ms O'Leary insisted she had entered the witness box with 'nothing to hide, only sources to protect' as she thanked them for trusting her. The BBC's legal team was granted a stay in the payment of the full award and initially said it was taking time to consider an appeal.
Belfast Telegraph
a day ago
- Belfast Telegraph
BBC confirms corporation will not appeal Gerry Adams libel ruling
Mr Adams took the BBC to court over a 2016 episode of its Spotlight programme, and an accompanying online story, which he said defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of former Sinn Fein official Denis Donaldson, in which he denies any involvement. Last month, a jury at the High Court in Dublin found in his favour and awarded him 100,000 euros (£84,000) after determining that was the meaning of words included in the programme and article. The BBC, which was found by the jury not to have acted in good faith nor in a fair and reasonable way, was also ordered to pay the former Sinn Fein leader's legal costs. In a statement on Friday evening, the BBC said: "We have given careful consideration to the jury's decision. "We will not be appealing its verdict, bringing this matter to a conclusion. We remain committed to public interest journalism and to serving all BBC audiences."
