High Court rejects challenge to introduction of “safe zone” around abortion clinic

The High Court has rejected a bid to have quashed Ealing Council's decision to introduce – through a public spaces protection order – a “safe zone” outside an abortion clinic.

The case of Dulgheriu & Anor v The London Borough of Ealing [2018] EWHC 1667 (Admin) centred on the Marie Stopes Clinic on Mattock Lane, Ealing.

The council introduced the PSPO in April this year. The claimants, who were both strong proponents of the pro-life stance, applied to the High Court to quash the order of the defendant so as to permit the protesters to return to the immediate vicinity of the clinic to continue their activities as before.

Mr Justice Turner rejected the claim, however. He said: “Having, in the circumstances of this case, undertaken a structured proportionality review, I have concluded that the defendant's decision to make a PSPO ought not to be quashed in whole or in part on this challenge.”

He also made the following observations:

1. This was not a case about the rights and wrongs of abortion;
2. The genuineness of the motives of the activists on both sides of the debate could not be doubted;
3. His conclusions in this case did not give the green light to local authorities to impose PSPOs as a matter of course upon areas in the immediate vicinity of abortion clinics. “Each case must be decided on its own facts.”

Cllr Julian Bell, leader of Ealing Council said: “We are delighted that HHJ Turner has emphatically upheld our PSPO at Mattock Lane in full with no parts quashed. This sends a clear message to those that have denied that there is evidence of unacceptable behaviour having a detrimental impact on people in this area, that there was a problem and action needed to be taken.

"The harassment and intimidation of local residents and those accessing legally available medical services was totally unacceptable and 'the feelings of intrusion' was clearly having a negative impact.”

Cllr Bell added: “Since the safe zone was implemented in April, we have seen a dramatic reduction in anti-social behaviour, confirming to us that we were right to take this action in the interest of those people living in the locality of Mattock Lane, and for those who visit the area.

"We do call on the Home Secretary to review our evidence and action, which shows that the activities which were taking place are similar to activities happening up and down the country on a daily basis and save other councils the significant costs that have been incurred in this matter, and to make specific legislation in respect of such activities in the interests of people all over the country."