The corporation had said there was an overwhelming case for the court\’s intervention because of the impact on the churchyard of the camp. The limited interference with the protesters\’ rights entailed in the removal of the tents was justified and proportionate, given the rights and freedoms of others, it argued.
There\’s a trade off of rights here, the courts are adjudicating that trade off.
\”The freedoms and rights of others, the interest of public health and public safety and the prevention of disorder and crime, and the need to protect the environment of this part of the City of London all demand the remedy which the court\’s orders will bring,\” said Lindblom in his lengthy judgment. The City had no \”sensible\” choice but to take action.