Home > yourrights > rights of gypsies and travellers/Evictions from Unauthorised Encampements > Evictions from Unauthorised Encampements
> Width of Possession Order or Injuntion
Width of possession orders/injunctions
It was previously the practice of some large landowners to obtain possession orders not only for the particular piece of land on which the Gypsies or Travellers were encamped without authorisation but also other parcels of land in their ownership within a wide radius of the area of the encampment. The Court of Appeal in Drury v SSEFRA (2004) made it clear that this should only be possible in exceptional circumstances and where it could be proved that there was a very real risk that the Gypsies or Travellers concerned might move to one of the other pieces of land covered by the application.
Some advisers feel that the Court of Appeal did not go far enough in Drury and continue to argue that a landowner should only be entitled to gain possession of the land which is being occupied without licence or consent and that it is wrong in principle to permit a landowner to obtain possession of land which is not adversely possessed.
A couple of large public landowners have recently decided to seek injunctions against certain named Travellers who regularly stop on their land without authorisation. These cases are being strongly defended on the basis that such decisions cannot be proportionate or reasonable when Gypsies and Travellers, through no fault of their own, are faced with a situation where there is a complete lack of authorised stopping places and permanent sites.
Some advisers feel that the Court of Appeal did not go far enough in Drury and continue to argue that a landowner should only be entitled to gain possession of the land which is being occupied without licence or consent and that it is wrong in principle to permit a landowner to obtain possession of land which is not adversely possessed.
A couple of large public landowners have recently decided to seek injunctions against certain named Travellers who regularly stop on their land without authorisation. These cases are being strongly defended on the basis that such decisions cannot be proportionate or reasonable when Gypsies and Travellers, through no fault of their own, are faced with a situation where there is a complete lack of authorised stopping places and permanent sites.
