Latest news with #injunction
BBC News
a day ago
- BBC News
Injunction stops explorers visiting Portsmouth's Spitbank Fort
An injunction to stop urban explorers visiting a historic fort has been Fort, between Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight, was originally built to deter a French invasion in the 19th Century and later converted into a luxury hotel before being sold in injunction granted on Wednesday prevents "anyone from climbing upon, or otherwise entering, occupying or remaining upon any part of Spitbank Fort" without Dare, partner at Steele Raymond representing the Hampshire fort's owner Fortify Solent, said the purpose of the order was to protect the site as well as keep people safe. "There've been quite a number of people accessing the fort, going over there by boat or by paddleboard, to film themselves wandering around outside and inside the fort and posting it on social media in order to generate likes and comments," said Ms property was not safe to get to, "not very safe to be in there, and if somebody were to get trapped inside it there's no mobile phone signal", she visiting the site had to break locks to get in, she added, saying the videos suggested the place was abandoned and people could just "wander in"."That's not true at all - it's private property," Ms Dare said."The comments that go alongside [the videos] are people saying 'we're gonna go too'… at that point you've got to do something." 'Thrilled' Ms Dare said the injunction meant anyone trespassing would automatically be in contempt of court and may be liable to criminal sanctions, adding her client was "thrilled" it had been granted."It's a relief, I think, that something has now been done to prevent people going across and using it," she said."It's a really cool building and it's been converted into this luxury hotel… you can see the fascination but at the end of the day it's private property." You can follow BBC Hampshire & Isle of Wight on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
The Guardian
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Ex-Tory minister says Afghan resettlement scheme was ‘most hapless display of ineptitude' he saw in government
Update: Date: 2025-07-16T07:09:49.000Z Title: Dan Sabbagh Content: Good morning. Normally when ministers make announcements in the House of Commons, we know at least some of the detail already because they been well trailed in advance. Yesterday was a rare example of a ministerial statement being used to reveal something utterly surprising and genuinely new (at least to anyone who had not seen the stories that dropped just 30 minutes earlier, when reporting restrictions were lifted). And this was a story about the murky operation of the Deep State. Here is our overnight story, by and Emine Sinmaz. Today attention is focusing on who is to blame. And two former Tory ministers are having their say in rival articles in the Daily Telegraph. Ben Wallace, who was defence secretary when the leak happened, has used his article to defend going to court to stop the inadvertent release of names being reported. He said: I make no apology for applying to the court for an injunction at the time. It was not, as some are childishly trying to claim, a cover up. I took the view that if this leak was reported at the time, the existence of the list would put in peril those we needed to help out. Some may disagree but imagine if the Taliban had been alerted to the existence of this list. I would dread to think what would have happened. Wallace has also been on the Today programme this morning, and he insisted he was not to blame for the injunction being a superinjunction. He said: When we applied in August 2023, when I was secretary of state, we didn't apply for superinjunction. We applied for a four-month injunction, a normal injunction. Wallace said it was the court that converted this into a superinjunction (meaning not just that the leak could not be reported, but the very existence of an injunction gagging the media could also not be reported). Wallace claimed he did not know why. In his article Wallace largely defends the decisions taken by the previous government, but Johnny Mercer, who was veterans ministers in the same government (but not in the MoD – he worked out of the Cabinet Office), is very critical of the way the whole Afghan resettlement programme was handled. In his Telegraph article he said: Whilst there will no doubt be a rush to blame the individual who sent it (I know who he is), it would be entirely unfair and wrong to do so. Because I can honestly say this whole farcical process has been the most hapless display of ineptitude by successive ministers and officials that I saw in my time in government, of which this poor individual was just the end of the line … The MoD has tried at every turn to cut off those from Afghan special forces units from coming to the UK, for reasons I cannot fathom. They also lied to themselves about doing it. The UK's director of Special Forces told me personally that he was offended and angry by my suggestion that his organisation was blocking the Triples. Certain MoD ministers had a criminal lack of professional curiosity as to why the Triples [members of the Afghan special forces] were being rejected when there were so many subject matter experts who said they clearly should be eligible. They even tried for a long time to say that Afghan special forces were not eligible. Mercer said the UK ended up letting the wrong people in. And the net result of this spectacular cluster is that we've let into this country thousands with little or tenuous links to the UK, and still some Afghan special forces we set up the bloody schemes for, remain trapped in Afghanistan, Pakistan or worse, Iran. I feel furious, sad and bitter about the whole thing, and do as much as I can to get through each day not thinking about Afghanistan. Here is the agenda for the day. 9.30am: Liz Kendall, work and pensions secretary, gives evidence to the Commons work and pensions committee. 10am: David Lammy, foreign secretary, gives evidence to the Commons international development committee. Noon: Keir Starmer faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs. Noon: The Home Office is publishing a report by David Anderson KC into the Prevent programme. If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can't read all the messages BTL, but if you put 'Andrew' in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @ The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can't promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
The Independent
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Former defence secretary makes ‘no apology' for Afghan injunction
The former Conservative defence secretary who applied for an injunction blocking reporting about the Afghan data leak has said he makes 'no apology'. Thousands of people are being relocated to the UK as part of a secret £850 million scheme set up in the wake of the breach. Sir Ben Wallace has said that the decision to apply for the gagging order was 'not as some are childishly trying to claim, a cover up' and that he believed that if the leak had been reported it would have 'put in peril those we needed to help out'. It came as Defence Secretary John Healey said that the person involved was 'no longer doing the same job'. A dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The Ministry of Defence only became aware of the breach when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023, and a superinjunction was made at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban finding out about the leak. Writing in the Telegraph, Sir Ben said that when he was informed of the 'error' he was 'determined that the first priority was to protect all those that might be at risk'. 'I make no apology for applying to the court for an injunction at the time. It was not, as some are childishly trying to claim, a cover up,' he said. 'I took the view that if this leak was reported at the time, the existence of the list would put in peril those we needed to help out. 'Some may disagree but imagine if the Taliban had been alerted to the existence of this list. I would dread to think what would have happened.' Sir Ben left office shortly after the then-government became aware of the breach, having announced some time earlier that he intended to step down as defence secretary. The leak led to the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – in April 2024. The scheme is understood to have cost around £400 million so far, with a projected cost once completed of around £850 million. A total of around 6,900 people expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme. It is understood that the unnamed official had emailed the dataset outside of a secure government system while attempting to verify information, believing the dataset to only have around 150 rows. However, there were more than 33,000 rows of information which were inadvertently sent. Downing Street declined to say on Tuesday whether the official involved had faced disciplinary action or was still employed by the Government. Mr Healey later told the News Agents podcast that 'they are no longer doing the same job on the Afghan brief' and that 'this is bigger than the actions of a single individual'. Pushed on whether anybody had lost their job, Mr Healey said: 'I'm actually not going to get into the personnel matters.' The injunction was in place for almost two years – covering Labour and Conservative governments. Mr Healey offered a 'sincere apology' on behalf of the Government in the Commons on Tuesday, and said he had been 'deeply uncomfortable' in being unable to speak about it in Parliament. Kemi Badenoch also said sorry on behalf of the Conservatives. Speaking to LBC on Tuesday evening, the Tory leader was asked whether she would apologise on behalf of the Conservatives who were in office at the time of the breach. She said: 'On behalf of the government and on behalf of the British people yes, because somebody made a terrible mistake and names were put out there… and we are sorry for that. 'That should not happen. And this is one of the tough things about, you know, being a minister, which is why even the Government – the Labour Government, now this didn't happen when they were in power – they are apologising as well.'
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Former defence secretary makes ‘no apology' for Afghan injunction
The former Conservative defence secretary who applied for an injunction blocking reporting about the Afghan data leak has said he makes 'no apology'. Thousands of people are being relocated to the UK as part of a secret £850 million scheme set up in the wake of the breach. Sir Ben Wallace has said that the decision to apply for the gagging order was 'not as some are childishly trying to claim, a cover up' and that he believed that if the leak had been reported it would have 'put in peril those we needed to help out'. It came as Defence Secretary John Healey said that the person involved was 'no longer doing the same job'. A dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The Ministry of Defence only became aware of the breach when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023, and a superinjunction was made at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban finding out about the leak. Writing in the Telegraph, Sir Ben said that when he was informed of the 'error' he was 'determined that the first priority was to protect all those that might be at risk'. 'I make no apology for applying to the court for an injunction at the time. It was not, as some are childishly trying to claim, a cover up,' he said. 'I took the view that if this leak was reported at the time, the existence of the list would put in peril those we needed to help out. 'Some may disagree but imagine if the Taliban had been alerted to the existence of this list. I would dread to think what would have happened.' Sir Ben left office shortly after the then-government became aware of the breach, having announced some time earlier that he intended to step down as defence secretary. The leak led to the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – in April 2024. The scheme is understood to have cost around £400 million so far, with a projected cost once completed of around £850 million. A total of around 6,900 people expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme. It is understood that the unnamed official had emailed the dataset outside of a secure government system while attempting to verify information, believing the dataset to only have around 150 rows. However, there were more than 33,000 rows of information which were inadvertently sent. Downing Street declined to say on Tuesday whether the official involved had faced disciplinary action or was still employed by the Government. Mr Healey later told the News Agents podcast that 'they are no longer doing the same job on the Afghan brief' and that 'this is bigger than the actions of a single individual'. Pushed on whether anybody had lost their job, Mr Healey said: 'I'm actually not going to get into the personnel matters.' The injunction was in place for almost two years – covering Labour and Conservative governments. Mr Healey offered a 'sincere apology' on behalf of the Government in the Commons on Tuesday, and said he had been 'deeply uncomfortable' in being unable to speak about it in Parliament. Kemi Badenoch also said sorry on behalf of the Conservatives. Speaking to LBC on Tuesday evening, the Tory leader was asked whether she would apologise on behalf of the Conservatives who were in office at the time of the breach. She said: 'On behalf of the government and on behalf of the British people yes, because somebody made a terrible mistake and names were put out there… and we are sorry for that. 'That should not happen. And this is one of the tough things about, you know, being a minister, which is why even the Government – the Labour Government, now this didn't happen when they were in power – they are apologising as well.'
Yahoo
10-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Collierville and homeowner reach agreement over parties and Airbnb listing, town says
Collierville and a homeowner have reached a settlement in a legal dispute, according to a town official. Collierville had filed a complaint in Shelby County Chancery Court against Rodney Williams, the owner of the property at 9496 Mayfield Road. The town sought injunctive relief against Williams to prevent the property from hosting pay-to-attend commercial events or being advertised as a short-term rental on Airbnb —both of which, the town says, are against its ordinances. "The Town's attorney spoke with both Mr. Williams and his attorney this afternoon, and they agreed to the entry of a consent decree putting in place a permanent injunction forbidding the use of the Mayfield property as a party venue and a short term rental," Town Administrator Molly Mehner told The Commercial Appeal in a statement on July 9. The Commercial Appeal's attempts to contact Williams for comment on July 9 were unsuccessful. The court had issued a temporary restraining order against Williams, which prohibited engaging in any activities at the property that "violate the Ordinances and applicable laws governing the use of the property." "We will ask for the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to be extended until the final order can be entered by the Court," Mehner said. A hearing had been scheduled for July 10 in Shelby County Chancery Court over the town's request for an injunction. COLLIERVILLE NEWS: Taxes, water/sewer rate and employee raises: Breaking down Collierville's new budget In its lawsuit, Collierville references two pay-to-attend parties at the residence, which it claims equate to running a business venture in a residential area and violate the town's ordinances. The lawsuit includes social media posts advertising the events. The town states in the lawsuit that commercial events at which admission is charged are not allowed uses in residential zoned property in Collierville. At the events in December and June, Collierville Police Department responded to several complaints from neighbors and arrested or cited several people for illegal possession of weapons, drug offenses and multiple traffic infractions, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit also states the occupancy at the residence exceeded the capacity and was in violation of the fire code regulations of the town. It also cited other concerns with the parties, including noise violations such as loud music and parking problems that negatively impacted surrounding homes. In the lawsuit, Collierville said the activities at the house party resembled operations of a nightclub, dance club, bar, or other place of assembly, none of which are approved uses under the zoning ordinance. Corey Davis is the Collierville and Germantown reporter with The Commercial Appeal. He can be reached at or 901-293-1610. To keep up with the latest news from the Shelby County suburbs, sign up here for our Suburban Pulse weekly newsletter. This article originally appeared on Memphis Commercial Appeal: Collierville: Agreement reached in Airbnb listing, parties dispute
