Trespass and Nuisance on Land

Offence relating to residing on land without consent in or with a vehicle.

Note that the offence can be committed by residing on the land and having a vehicle on the land; or by intending to do so. So the mens rea and actus reus will depend on the circumstances.

Under subsection (1)(a), where P is not already residing on the land, P intends to reside, on land without the consent of the occupier of the land.

Under subsection (1)(b), where P does not already have a vehicle on the land, P intends to have at least one vehicle with them on the land.

Under subsection (2)(b)(i), intends reside on the land without the consent of the occupier of the land.

Under subsection (2)(b)(ii), where P does not already have a vehicle on the land, intends to have at least one vehicle with them on the land.

Under subsection (1)(a), residing on land without the consent of the owner.

Under subsection (1)(b), has at least one vehicle with them on the land.

Under subsection (2), fails to comply with the request to leave the land or remove property that is in P’s possession or under P’s control from the land to as soon as reasonably practicable.

or

enters or re-enters) the land within the prohibited period (12 months from the day on which the request was made); and has at least one vehicle with them on the land.

Under subsection 6 it is a defence for the accused to show that the accused had a reasonable excuse for —

failing to comply as soon as reasonably practicable with the request mentioned in subsection (1)(d),

or

after receiving such a request, entering (or re-entering) the land with the intention of residing there without the consent of the occupier of the land.

The person is 18 or over.

One or more of the conditions in subsection (4) is satisfied. These are:

• in a case where P is residing on the land, significant damage or significant disruption has been caused or is likely to be caused as a result of P’s residence;
• in a case where P is not yet residing on the land, it is likely that significant damage or significant disruption would be caused as a result of P’s residence if P were to reside on the land;
• that significant damage or significant disruption has been caused or is likely to be caused as a result of conduct carried on, or likely to be carried on, by P while P is on the land;
• that significant distress has been caused or is likely to be caused as a result of offensive conduct carried on, or likely to be carried on, by P while P is on the land.

The occupier, a representative of the occupier or a constable requests P to do either or both of the following:

• leave the land;
• remove from the land property that is in P’s possession or under P’s control.

Prosecutors should note the Home Office statutory guidance on Unauthorised encampments June 2022, which contains guidance on this new offence and amendments to other offences. This includes a non-exhaustive list of the types of circumstances that may amount to significant damage, disruption, or distress.

The person must be residing in or intending to reside in, or with, a vehicle. This means that the provisions do not capture ramblers or prevent those who wish to enjoy the countryside from doing so.

Subsection 8 contains a number of definitions, including for “damage”, disruption”, “offensive conduct” and “vehicle”.

s.60D provides the police with a power to seize and remove property that appears to belong to the person who the constable suspects has committed the offence, and is in their possession or under their control.

Under new s.60E seized property can be forfeited and dealt with in a manner specified by order of the court which convicts P of an offence under s.60C.

Fails to leave as soon as reasonably practicable

or

Returns within 3 months

Returns within 12 months from 28 June 2022.

D was not trespassing;

Reasonable excuse.

The order to leave can only be made by a senior police officer present at the scene and they must reasonably believe the following:

• that there are two or more trespassers;
• they have a common purpose of residing on the land;
• the occupier has taken reasonable steps to ask them to leave; and
• either the trespassers have caused damage to the land or property on it or have used insulting words or behaviour to the occupier or their family/employees/agents;
• or they have more than six vehicles between them on the land.

From 28 June 2022 these conditions are broadened to include where the person has caused damage, disruption or distress, which are defined in subsection 10.

“Land” does not include buildings other than agricultural buildings or scheduled monuments and does not include land forming part of highways or roads: s.61(9).

From 28 June 2022, s.61(9) is amended so that “land” does include land that forms part of a highway.

Fails to leave as soon as reasonably practicable

or

Returns within 3 months.

Returns within 12 months from 28 June 2022.

D was not trespassing;

Reasonable excuse.

The order to leave (and remove property) can only be made by a senior police officer present at the scene and they must reasonably believe the following:

• that there are at least two people trespassing on the land; and
• they have at least 1 vehicle on the land; and
• their common purpose is to reside on the land for any period; and
• (in the case of them having any caravans) there is a suitable pitch available on a caravan site; and
• the occupier has asked them to leave.

Fails to leave land as soon as reasonably practicable

or

Returns within 7 days.

Reasonable excuse;

“Exempt person” (defined in sub-section (10)).

The direction may only be given by an officer of the rank of superintendent or above who must reasonably believe that:

• 2 or more persons are preparing to hold a rave; or
• 10 or more persons are waiting for a rave to begin; or
• 10 or persons are attending the rave which is in progress.

See sub-sections (1) and (1A) for what constitutes a rave.

Where the rave is in the open air (sub-section (1)) the persons on the land need not be trespassers.

Where it is not in the open air it only applies if the persons are trespassers (sub- section (1A)).

The officer making the direction need not be “present at the scene” and it can be conveyed to the persons by any constable who is present.

“Lawful activity” is defined in sub- section (2) and briefly is anything which does not constitute an offence or a trespass.

“Land” includes buildings: DPP v Chivers [2010] EWHC 1814 (Admin).

The acts relied on need not be illegal in themselves.

Provided it is carried out with the requisite intention (intimidation etc.) any act may fulfil the criterion for the offence. Taking part in a mass invasion of a store and controlling it by force of numbers was enough to constitute an act which was separate from the trespass for the purposes of s.68: Edward Bauer & Ors v DPP [2013] EWHC 634 (Admin).

Note that it not necessary that intimidation etc. actually be caused by the act (or even be likely). It is only necessary to prove the intention.

Fails to leave as soon as reasonably practicable

or

Returns within 3 months.

Not trespassing;

Reasonable excuse.

The direction may only be given by a senior police officer present at the scene who must reasonably believe:

• That the person has committed, is committing or intends to commit aggravated trespass; or
• That there are 2 or more trespassers on the land with the common purpose of committing aggravated trespass.

Left the premises within 24 hours of service of the IPO and did not return.

No copy of the IPO was fixed to the premises.

Fails to leave and remove any vehicles as soon as practicable

or

Returns within 3 months.

The local authority may obtain an order on complaint to the magistrates’ court that a s.77 direction is not being complied with. The order may authorise the local authority to enter the land and remove vehicles or other property.

The local authority must give 24 hours’ notice of their intention.

Did not believe the person requiring them to leave was a displaced residential occupier; (etc.) (sub-section (2).

Premises mainly non-residential and they were not in any part that was residential.

As amended by s.73 CJPOA.

See s.144 LASPOA below. Note there is no need to prove D was requested to leave for s.144 LASPOA but the definition for residential premises is narrower. Unless the premises in question do not meet that definition prosecutors should charge s.144 to avoid having to prove the request to D to leave.

See also Ministry of Justice Circular 2012/04.

Note that the Attorney General’s consent is required.

See Diplomatic Immunity and Diplomatic Premises legal guidance.

“Building” includes temporary or moveable structures.

“Residential” means it was adapted to be lived in before the entry.

See s.7 CLA above. Note there is no need to prove D was requested to leave for s.144 LASPOA but the s.144 definition for residential premises is narrower. Unless the premises in question do not meet that definition prosecutors should charge s.144 to avoid having to prove the request to D to leave.

See also Ministry of Justice Circular 2012/04.

Wilfully (can be evidenced by refusal to leave when asked to do so by a railway employee/agent etc. - R (Mair) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board [2002] P.I.Q. R. P4 QBD).

Trespass (a railway may exclude anyone who is not there for the purpose of using the railway).

Obstruct or impede any officer/agent upon/in any of the stations or other works or premises connected therewith.

Trespass on a railway (included platforms, station concourse connected premises).

Will apply in situations where someone is making a nuisance of themselves on railway premises (for example, drunk, begging) and refusing to leave.

It will also apply if somebody trespasses on an area of the railway where the public is not allowed (for example, tracks or embankment) but only if they are asked to leave by an employee and refuse.

Being or passing on any railway.

Being on any railway (does not include the railway platform Thomson v Great North of Scotland Rly Co (1829) 64 JP 178).

Applies where people have crossed railways tracks at an unauthorised point. Note the need for a warning which will usually be by written notice.