header-logo header-logo

20 November 2014 / Tim Lawson-Cruttenden
Issue: 7631 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Persons unknown

Tim Lawson-Cruttenden examines the evolution of claims against unnamed defendants in non-land law cases

On 8 October Mrs Justice McGowan ordered injunctive relief in Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd v (1) Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty and (2) Persons Unknown [2014] EWHC 3429 (QB).

The injunction is intended to protect the employees of Novartis, an international pharmaceutical company, against harassment by animal rights activists. Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, whose membership is unknown and deliberately anonymous, were joined into the action using the representative mechanism under CPR 19.6. This mechanism enables unincorporated associations to be sued through a named individual. However, the making of orders against “persons unknown” was thought to be sufficiently innovative for the High Court to seek a review of this developing area of the law which has thus far had little supervision from the Court of Appeal.

The purpose of this article, in relation to the joining in as defendants of persons unknown, is to consider:

  1. the historical law up to 2003;
  2. recent developments since 2003;
  3. the effect of the Novartis decision; and
  4. the impact
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll