High Court upholds injunction against environmental activists targeting energy infrastructure

The High Court has maintained an injunction against unnamed defendants linked to environmental protests in a significant judgement delivered on 11 July 2025. The King's Bench Division reviewed the ongoing injunction against "Persons Unknown" associated with Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil movements, affirming protection of essential sites vital to the UK's energy infrastructure.

The claimants, Esso Petroleum Company Limited and ExxonMobil Chemical Limited, sought continuation of the injunction initially granted in 2022 following escalating protest actions targeting their operations. The companies emphasised the necessity of the injunction given these sites represent critical components of the national energy supply whilst involving substantial safety risks.

Background and operational significance

The injunction was originally secured to prevent trespassers from disrupting facilities managing highly flammable and hazardous materials. The Fawley site, the UK's largest oil refinery, exemplifies the significant role these installations play in the broader national energy apparatus, providing approximately 20% of the country's refinery capacity.

The court examined witness statements outlining a pattern of unlawful invasion and significant obstacles posed to the claimants' operations. Evidence indicated that interference could disrupt business operations whilst posing evident threats to public safety given the volatile materials handled at these sites.

Judicial proceedings and evidence

The judge reviewed several previous orders, including those asserting the necessity for annual reviews of such injunctions. Past rulings demonstrated both consistent need for these injunctions and highlighted risks associated with public protests around industrial sites.

A notable aspect concerned the ongoing threat of protests, evidenced by communications from the Just Stop Oil campaign acknowledging the efficacy of such injunctions in deterring direct actions. Court documents indicated that injunctions had compelled these groups to seek alternative targets. However, the judge expressed concerns regarding potential renewed direct action should these legal protections be weakened.

Legal framework and rationale

The court underscored that principles of law surrounding injunctions against "Persons Unknown" continue evolving. As established by the Supreme Court, such injunctions should provide robust legal framework to safeguard against actions that may compromise public safety and health.

The Honourable Mr Justice Sweeting concluded that no material changes warranted discharge of the injunction, reaffirming the necessity of these legal protections. Justice Sweeting asserted that imminent risk of direct action remains real, justifying continued enforcement on grounds of maintaining public safety and protecting vital infrastructure.

The judgement reiterated the importance of proper notification procedures for any direct actions taken against these injunctions, ensuring all parties are adequately informed.

Implications and precedent

The court reaffirmed that the injunction would continue in its existing form, with only limited amendments outlined, indicating that ongoing concerns regarding safety and operational security remain paramount. The ruling represents a crucial balancing of rights between public activism and the necessity to protect critical infrastructure within the UK's energy sector.

This judgement suggests a precedent for future cases involving similar issues, reflecting the judiciary's commitment to addressing complexities surrounding public protests and industrial safety. The decision reinforces the legal framework protecting essential national infrastructure whilst acknowledging the evolving nature of environmental activism and its intersection with critical industrial operations.

Copyright & permissions