This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23155782

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Grow Heathrow: Campaigners rejected by Court of Appeal Grow Heathrow: Campaigners rejected by Court of Appeal
(about 1 hour later)
Squatters who set up a community garden project on private land close to Heathrow Airport have failed to overturn a High Court ruling. Squatters who set up a community garden on private land close to Heathrow Airport have failed to overturn a High Court ruling ordering them to leave.
Last year, the court ruled that Grow Heathrow had to leave the land because the owner, Imran Malik, should not be denied his ownership or right to find use of it. Last year, the court ruled Grow Heathrow had to vacate the land because owner Imran Malik should not be denied his ownership or right to use it.
Grow Heathrow has now had its appeal rejected at the Court of Appeal.Grow Heathrow has now had its appeal rejected at the Court of Appeal.
Campaigner Joe Rake said: "We are very disappointed." Campaigners spoke of their disappointment and vowed to take the matter to the Supreme Court.
"But we feel like this isn't the end yet," he added. Joe Rake said: "We are very disappointed. We feel like this isn't the end yet."
"We will work with the local MP and residents association to try to persuade the owners if the community can buy the land off them as a community land trust." The Court of Appeal judge rejected a request by the campaigners to appeal to the Supreme Court, but protesters said they were still planning to apply to appeal "outside of the case".
Community 'benefit' Their lawyer, Jayesh Kunwardia, of Hodge Jones and Allen, said of Wednesday's judgement: "For the first time, an Appeal Court judge has acknowledged the right to a home and family life should be considered in eviction proceedings by private landlords.
Mr Malik's solicitor has previously said: "Whilst no doubt Grow Heathrow have put in a lot of work in clearing up and improving the site, at the end of the day this gives them no legal right to continue trespassing on the land. 'Watershed moment'
"As for the future, Mr Malik has his own plans to utilise the site in ways that he considers will be of benefit to the local community." "This is a huge step forward for tenants or squatters facing unreasonable evictions, especially where the residents have young children.
The land in Sipson, in the borough of Hillingdon in west London, was originally earmarked for a third runway at Heathrow. "We now want the Supreme Court to determine if the Human Rights Act should be taken into account when private landlords evict."
Grow Heathrow said its legal argument pitted the right to a home under Article Eight of the European Convention of Human Rights against the principle of private property. But Mr Malik's solicitor Caroline DeLaney, of Kingsley Napley, said: "The Court of Appeal's conclusion is not surprising, as to prefer squatters' rights over those of a private landowner who has acted promptly to recover possession cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered proportionate.
The group said it cleared "30 tonnes of rubbish" when it moved onto the land. "The case marks a watershed moment in property cases, by expressly applying human rights principles to private landowners.
Sam Sorrell of Grow Heathrow said 17 people were living on the site. "For owners of real estate, this is a worrying development because it allows squatters to delay claims for possession and add cost and uncertainty to cases which should proceed as straightforward applications for possession."
The Court of Appeal judge rejected a request by the campaigners to appeal to the Supreme Court, however the protesters said they were still planning to apply to appeal "outside of the case". The land in Sipson, in the borough of Hillingdon, in west London, was originally earmarked for a third runway at Heathrow.
Since September, the offence of squatting in a residential building has carried a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment, a fine of up to £5,000 or both.Since September, the offence of squatting in a residential building has carried a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment, a fine of up to £5,000 or both.
It is a civil, not criminal, offence to squat in commercial properties.It is a civil, not criminal, offence to squat in commercial properties.