Met seeks further bid to challenge High Court ruling over Sarah Everard vigil

Scotland Yard confirmed on Friday evening that they are now seeking permission from the Court of Appeal to challenge the High Court decision.

Rebecca Speare-Cole
Friday 29 April 2022 21:11
The vigil for Sarah Everard in March 2021 (Victoria Jones/PA)
The vigil for Sarah Everard in March 2021 (Victoria Jones/PA)

The Metropolitan Police are seeking another bid to challenge the High Court’s ruling over the Sarah Everard vigil.

High Court judges earlier this month refused the force permission to appeal against its March ruling, which concluded that officers breached the rights of vigil organisers with its handling of the planned event in March 2021.

However, Scotland Yard confirmed on Friday evening that they are now seeking permission from the Court of Appeal to challenge the High Court decision.

The campaign Reclaim These Streets (RTS) group, which organised the event, criticised the force earlier on Friday.

A woman talks to a police officer during a gathering in Clapham Common, London, after the Reclaim These Streets vigil for Sarah Everard was officially cancelled (Victoria Jones/PA)

The group tweeted: “We can now announce that @metpoliceuk are spending more taxpayer money to continue to fight us in court.

“Despite the High Court’s vehement rejection of their “hopeless” application for permission to appeal, they are now trying to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

“Will it never end?”

Responding to RTS’s tweet, the Met Police said its appeal is not focused on the policing of the vigil itself but decisions and communications with RTS ahead of the event.

TODO: define component type factbox

In a statement, the force said: “The reason we’re appealing this case is that we believe there are important points of principle around the role of police in advising organisers ahead of a proposed event and whether that should involve an assessment of the importance of the cause.

“We believe that clarity around these issues is of the utmost importance both for citizens and their right to free expression, and for the police in how they enforce legal restrictions while remaining neutral to the cause behind the event itself.

“This appeal is not about the policing of the vigil itself, but about the decisions and communications with Reclaim These Streets ahead of the planned event last March.

“As an organisation we work with, support and police hundreds of protests and events across London every month and take our responsibilities very seriously. We welcome and fully accept the important principles of scrutiny and challenge into this area of policing.”

RTS proposed a socially distanced vigil for the 33-year-old, who was murdered by former Met officer Wayne Couzens, near to where she went missing in Clapham, south London, in March last year.

Solicitor Theodora Middleton (centre) of Bindmans LLP, reads a statement on behalf of Reclaim These Streets founders (left to right) Henna Shah, Jamie Klingler, Anna Birley and Jessica Leigh outside the Royal Courts of Justice after judges ruled that the Metropolitan Police breached the rights of the organisers of a vigil for Sarah Everard (Yui Mok/PA)

The four women who founded RTS and planned the vigil brought a legal challenge against the force over its handling of the event, which was also intended to be a protest about violence against women.

RTS withdrew from organising the vigil after being told by the force they would face fines of £10,000 each and possible prosecution if the event went ahead.

However, a spontaneous vigil and protest took place instead.

Jessica Leigh, Anna Birley, Henna Shah and Jamie Klingler argued that decisions made by the force in advance of the planned vigil amounted to a breach of their human rights to freedom of speech and assembly, and said the force did not assess the potential risk to public health.

In a ruling in March, their claim was upheld by Lord Justice Warby and Mr Justice Holgate, who found that the Met’s decisions in the run-up to the event were “not in accordance with the law”.

After considering an application on paper – without a hearing – by the Met to challenge the ruling at the Court of Appeal, the judges refused permission.

However, they are now asking the Court of Appeal itself to grant permission to challenge the ruling.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in