Motor Fuel Limited & Anor v Persons Unknown & Anor

Summary judgment may be granted in an unopposed claim for a final injunction against persons unknown, including newcomers, where the claimant establishes a good cause of action and the evidence shows no realistic defence. The court must assess whether the defendant has a realistic prospect of success and whether there is any compelling reason for trial. An injunction may restrain anticipated trespass where the feared tort is supported by demonstrable grounds. In claims against newcomers, the court must apply the principles of justice and equity and consider the relevant procedural safeguards, including clear identification by conduct, precise geographical limits, review, and a right to apply to vary or set aside the order. Damages may be inadequate where trespass creates serious safety risks and irreparable reputational harm.

The claimants owned and operated part of Thirsk Services, a fuel, electric-vehicle charging and retail site. They sought summary judgment and a final injunction against persons unknown defined by conduct, namely persons entering or occupying the site without consent and persons intending to siphon fuel without consent.

An interim injunction had stopped repeated trespass, attempted encampments, interference with vehicles and pumps, intimidation, damage and attempted fuel siphoning. The defendants had filed no acknowledgment of service, admission, defence or evidence and did not attend the hearing. The central issues were whether summary judgment was permissible and appropriate, whether a final injunction could be granted against persons unknown including newcomers, and whether alternative service should be ordered.

1. Summary judgment. Permission to apply was granted under Civil Procedure Rules 1998, rule 24.4(1). The claim was suitable for summary judgment because it was unopposed, the interim injunction had been effective, and listing a trial would be disproportionate. Default judgment was inappropriate because the claim sought injunctive relief against persons unknown, including newcomers, on a without-notice basis.
2. The court applied the rule 24.3 test, as approached in Vistra Trust Cooperation (UK) Ltd v CDS (Superstores International) Ltd [2022] EWHC 3382. The question was whether the defendants had a real or realistic prospect of successfully defending the claim, or whether there was another compelling reason for trial. The court could decide the matter where it had the evidence reasonably required and the parties had an adequate opportunity to address it.
3. Following National Highways Ltd v Persons Unknown [2023] 1 WLR 2088, the same summary-judgment approach applied despite the defendants being persons unknown. The claimants established a good cause of action in trespass and demonstrated persistent unlawful conduct. The absence of any evidence in opposition was highly relevant, and there was no realistic defence to the claim.
4. A precautionary injunction did not require proof that every person subject to it had individually committed the tort. It was sufficient that the feared tort was established on demonstrable grounds. The serious and continuing risk of trespass, nuisance, fuel siphoning, injury, damage and reputational harm justified relief. Damages were inadequate because of the safety risks and potentially irreparable business and reputational damage.
5. The court had jurisdiction to grant a final injunction against persons unknown, including newcomers, applying Wolverhampton City Council v London Gypsies & Travellers [2024] AC 983, Valero Energy Limited v Persons Unknown [2024] EWHC 134 and Heathrow Airport Limited v Persons Unknown [2024] EWHC 2599. The order was sufficiently clear and precise, geographically limited, excluded the Costa Coffee area, lasted three years from expiry of the interim injunction, provided for review, and preserved a right to apply to set aside or vary it. Summary judgment and the final injunction were granted, subject to restoring two A1 signs and removing Leeds Gate Gypsy and Traveller Exchange from future service.