Lawyers at the ready as City of London resumes Occupy LSX action
The City of London Corporation has resumed its legal action against protestors occupying space around St Paul’s Cathedral after a two-week hiatus.
In a statement today the City’s planning and highways committee said it was re-commencing the legal action designed to move tents off the highway around the cathedral.
The City first took legal advice over the occupation at the end of October (28 October 2011).
Landmark Chambers’ David Forsdick is advising the corporation, with the work being led in-house by City solicitor and comptroller Andrew Colvin.
The City’s policy chairman Stuart Fraser said that talks with occupiers on shrinking the extent of the tents and setting a departure date had “got nowhere”.
“We’d still like to sort this without court action but from now on we’ll have to have any talks in parallel with court action – not instead,” said Fraser in the City’s announcement.
The City is due to send a letter today to Bindmans, which is representing the occupiers, asking for tents and equipment to be moved. A notice will be issued tomorrow asking those with tents and equipment on the highway near St Paul’s to move within 24 hours.
If tents remain, High Court proceedings will be issued, although the City also said it will continue attempts to reach an agreement.
The news comes as police in New York have evicted protestors from a similar camp in Wall Street on health and safety grounds.
Readers' comments (10)
Anonymous | 15-Nov-2011 5:04 pm
maybe should challenge "City of London Corporation " as undemocratic-local authority?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15-Nov-2011 6:11 pm
Too much free thinking
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15-Nov-2011 6:43 pm
This used to happen an awful lot when I was a young man. People simply putting up tents all over the field so we had to cut lunch and milk the main herd in the late afternoon instead. I remember wondering whether the police could do anything about it. This I suppose is your answer. You live and learn.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mouse | 16-Nov-2011 9:45 am
I'd forgotten that the Occupy protesters had a democratic mandate from the people of the UK/London. Oh, what's that, they don't?!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Julian Hedgefund | 16-Nov-2011 10:21 am
maybe should challenge the "occupiers" as unwanted illegal wastes of space?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Kim Philby | 16-Nov-2011 10:26 am
About time!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16-Nov-2011 12:44 pm
I think that it should be the responsibility of all of us to tell the Occupiers that if they honestly feel that they represent 99% of the population then they should respect the democratic process and stand for election. I do not pretend that everything is perfect but the response of these people is profoundly undemocratic and self-indulgent
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16-Nov-2011 6:03 pm
What any church has to do with the financial crisis still baffles me. Further, it appears (surprise, surprise), that hardly any of those tents are occupied at night - perhaps the authorities should take advantage and clear all those unoccupied tents during the night - that would then give this unique group something to protest about and will give the rest of the country (and the Church), something to laugh about. The saga has gone on long enough.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16-Nov-2011 11:25 pm
Who is paying Messrs Bindmans fees in this?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joanne Harris | 17-Nov-2011 10:41 am
Anonymous @ 11.25pm: nobody. Bindmans and the team of barristers led by John Cooper QC are acting pro bono, as reported in our 28 October story.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment