The Court of Appeal gave judgment on Thursday 16 November 2017 at 2 p.m. Although the Court of Appeal refused our appeal, the judgment is extremely important in that it acknowledges that public parks are held by local authorities on trust for the purpose of public enjoyment and the public are its beneficial owners; as such the public have a statutory right to use the land for recreational purposes and the local authority owner must allow the public free and unrestricted use of it.

Although the Court found that s.145 of the Local Government Act 1972 is not limited by any other statutory provision and gives the local authority the power to exclude the public from public parks notwithstanding the public’s rights, that power must be exercised lawfully and not perversely or to frustrate the purpose of the trust (i.e. the public’s right to use the land for recreational purposes). Crucially, the Court of Appeal raises therefore the prospect that where a local authority uses s.145 to exclude the public from a park, that decision can be challenged by residents asserting that the closure of a park is unlawful because it interferes too much with the public’s right to use the park for recreation.

Also, as the court has found that the Council holds Finsbury Park on trust for the public, this means that any monies rasied by the Council from the hire of Finsbury Park must be used only for the purpose of Finsbury Park. We will also be asking Haringey Council to account for all the monies they have raised by the hire of Finsbury Park as they are only allowed to spend the monies on Finsbury itself. The Friends are concerned that in fact the Council has been using the monies for it’s general parks budget.

The Friends of Finsbury Park maintain however that a local authority’s power to exclude the public from a park is limited by the restrictions on space and time as set out in the Public Health Amendment Act 1890, section 44 (closure of a park for no more than 12 days in a year or 6 consecutive days on any one occasion) and the Ministry of Housing and Local Government Provisional Order Confirmation (Greater London Parks and Open Spaces) Act 1967, Article 7 (max of 1/10 of park to be closed).

We have therefore applied for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and will continue to raise funds to be able to do this including for their potential exposure to the other sides’ costs, the court fees and copying charges; the Friends’ legal team continues to act on a conditional fee (no win no fee) basis.

Although we have lost the appeal this case is gathering momentum fast as people all over the country begin to hear about how their parks will be affected. Many thanks for your donations and support this far. More updates soon!

Yesterday our case was heard by the Court of Appeal (Lord Justices Hickinbottom, Singh and Treacy) in court 70 of the Royal Courts of Justice, and heard argument from the parties (Richard Harwood QC for the Friends of Finsbury Park; George Laurence QC for the Open Spaces Society; Philip Kolvin for Haringey Council and Robert McCracken QC for Wireless Festival). The Court of Appeal thanked the parties for their legal arguments and observed that this was a very interesting case. A reserved judgment was given, which means that they will go away to write their judgments and deliver them in the next month or so. We will post the judgement as soon as we have it.

A huge thanks to all of you who have donated and supported our campaign so far. We have received over £5,000 of donations and with seven days to go we need to raise more so please donate if you haven’t already!

It's crunch time as this 'test case' is now of critical nationwide importance for councils and public spaces in London and beyond:

• Although primarily a London campaign, should we win our legal case, The Friends of Finsbury Park would set a legal precedent and a nationwide cap on the number of days a year that parks can be rented out, and the size of events in London.

Here’s an explanation of how this case could affect your local park:

• In London, there is the explicit area restriction of max of 1/10 of the park to be closed off by virtue of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government Provisional Order Confirmation (Greater London Parks and Open Spaces) Act 1967, Article 7.
• In London and the rest of the country, section 44 of the Public Health Acts Amended Act 1890 limits the time that a park can be closed to no more than 12 days in a year or 6 consecutive days on any one occasion.
• The Council and Wireless say that s.145 of the Local Government Act 1972 allows a local authority to ignore the 1967 Act and the 1890 Act.  We say it doesn't.
• So, if we are right, London parks will be subject to an area limit and a time limit; local authority parks outside London will be subject to the time limit only (so our case will still be of benefit to parks outside London in that the time limit will apply).
• We say there are obvious reasons for having an area restriction in London given the size and built up nature of the capital and the greater distances to be travelled to open areas.

We are so grateful to all of you who have donated already. If you are just finding out about our campaign, please show your support by donating what you can and help us to protect your park!

       (From left to right) Tom Palin, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Kevin Duffy, Simon Hunt - Chair

As the Protect London's Parks Campaign gathers momentum, three generations of Friends of Finsbury Park Chairs met with the Friend’s patron, Jeremy Corbyn MP on Friday who gave his full support to our campaign and expressed his concern over the use of commercial events in Finsbury Park. He said, "I know and love Finsbury Park, but it needs to be a park for all, all of the time, which means management and restrictions of all events in the times of year that the park is occupied by these events."

Jeremy also raised the prospect of discussing new policies/legislation with his shadow environment minister for the restriction of the use of public spaces for private events. Should we win our legal case, we would set a legal precedent and a London-wide cap on the number of days a year that parks can be rented out, and the size of events. And our case will have benefits to local authority parks all over the country as well, as restrictions to the amount of days a year parks are allowed to be used for commercial events, will be applied.

Our case is of vital importance to local authority managed public parks. As has been highlighted by Haringey Council’s proposals for next summer’s events in Finsbury Park, applications have already been made for the closures of the Park for up to 6 large-scale events. This means that large areas of the Park would be closed for up to 10 weeks of the summer, just on the basis of the information received so far. We anticipate that further event applications may be on the way.

The Friends of Finsbury Park legal action is not about banning events in public parks outright. If we win the appeal, the ruling will not ban commercial events, but it will restrict the number of days of events, and the size of events, to a level that is sustainable and continues to preserve London parks as areas of tranquillity and natural beauty, free and open to all.

A huge thank you to all who have donated so far, but we still need to raise more money. This is a 'test case' of critical nationwide importance for councils and public spaces in London and beyond so please show your support and donate now!