On 18 July 2024, five protestors (including the co-founder of Just Stop Oil) were convicted of conspiring intentionally to cause a public nuisance, contrary to section 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 and section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977. These offences related to protests on the M25 across four days in November 2022, during which 45 people climbed onto the gantries causing disruption. It is estimated that the protests caused £750,000 of damage, over 700,000 drivers were affected, and the Metropolitan Police incurred costs in excess of £1 million. 

During a criminal trial, judges restrict evidence to that which is relevant to the case at hand. In this case, the five defendants put forward a “reasonable excuse” defence, arguing that their actions were justified as raising the alarm about the climate crisis. This defence was rejected at trial, along with assertions that the jury could make acquittals on the basis of their conscience. The defendants were however permitted to give evidence about their political and philosophical beliefs. It was later ruled that their views were irrelevant to the question of whether they were guilty or not guilty. The prosecution did however read out various agreed facts relating to climate change including that it is an existential threat to humanity.

Each defendant raised concerns that they had not had a fair trial, and parts of the trial spiralled into chaos: the police were called into court seven times because of disturbances; the jury was sent out multiple times due to continued references to climate change; and four out of the five defendants were arrested and remanded to prison. Outside of court, 11 protestors were arrested for contempt of court (although proceedings for which have now been discontinued). 

At the conclusion of the trial, all five defendants were found guilty. Four of them were jailed for four years, whilst the co-founder of Just Stop Oil was jailed for five years. These lengthy sentences, which have been criticised by the UN, are reported to be the longest sentences for non-violent protests. An open letter has been sent to the Attorney General by Just Stop Oil condemning the sentences (supported by 1,200 people including various public figures). The Attorney General has since said that he has no power to intervene in this case. In the meantime, on 26 July 2024, the National Highways were granted an injunction preventing protestors from blocking the M25 until 10 May 2025.

Non-violent protests and disruption are often key tools for climate activists. Given the draconian nature of the sentences awarded to all five defendants, it is likely they were designed to act as a deterrent for others. This highly publicised trial will no doubt be in the minds of activists, who may think twice before engaging in similar action (or will need to be willing to face the criminal consequences).

This begs the question, what other legal methods are available to individuals and organisations to achieve their aims? Activists, charities and other organisations are now turning to strategic litigation instead to fuel change. The statistics show that climate related litigation is on the rise, with more claims being brought than ever before. The success of strategic litigation relies on identifying a potential claim, assessing the merits, and then taking action. Action could take the form of a judicial review, intervening in claims brought by others, soft law mechanisms, or bringing a civil claim (the cause of action for which can be wide reaching).

The recent decision in Verein Klimaseniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland was the first time an international court ruled that state inaction related to climate change violated human rights. Cases like this are promising and showcase the ability of strategic litigation to create real change. They raise the profile of the underlying issues in the minds of policy makers, decision makers and regulators.

We have excellent credentials for taking on and winning strategic litigation that has a widespread positive impact. If you or your organisation would like to discuss bringing a challenge, please contact either Leticia Jennings or Katy Sawyer.