Die britische Anwaltskanzlei trainierte Universitäten, um umfassende Protestverbote zu erhalten
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/jun/30/british-law-firm-shakespeare-martineau-cardiff-university-protests
Von edufixflow
Die britische Anwaltskanzlei trainierte Universitäten, um umfassende Protestverbote zu erhalten
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/jun/30/british-law-firm-shakespeare-martineau-cardiff-university-protests
Von edufixflow
10 Kommentare
Sweeping protest bans on unauthorised protests on their property that usually have large encampments*
Oh sod off. Universities don’t spend tens of thousands getting an injunction (and nor will the court grant one) unless they’ve tried everything else and the protests are very disruptive.
The sorts of cases where these are granted include where students have locked themselves inside academic buildings – such as lecture halls and libraries – or are intimidating people in public. Universities also owe it to other students to let them study and take exams in peace.
The “newcomer” injunctions against “persons unknown” are needed because students refuse to identify themselves and are often joined by people who aren’t students at all.
With regard to comments made by other people, the problem here is that bans on things most people would consider unreasonable can quickly escalate to bans on anything the university finds mildly inconvenient.
There’s probably no universally acceptable solution to this but I tend toward the view that people in the UK do not assign enough value to civil liberties – and I say that not entirely agreeing with some of the protests we stereotypically see from university students.
My University had a sit-in in one of the buildings for a few days to demonstrate against the fact the Dean (and some other staff) were on such a wedge you could’ve paid half the cleaning staff with their salary. They were fucking livid.
After this happened they were coached, instigated a whole lot of rules and constantly threatened police.
Went from something like 6th in the country to nearly the 100th in a span of two years, half the staff sacked off and the Dean loudly wondering what happened.
Some Universities deserve to fail.
Strange angle. When someone does something legally, normally we focus on the principal. So, a university for instance, or a corporation, or a person.
We don’t normally read articles that focus so heavily on the law firm that did the work, after all they are just representatives. If the universities didn’t want an injunction, they wouldn’t engage a law firm.
I want to just comment that „legal“ isn’t enough of an argument to recognise protests and struggles against oppression, injustice by the ruling class who know just how to bend the rules to make things legal because they made the rules with this bending in mind.
You’re telling me that multi-billion pound organisations, experiencing significant disruption to their operations, get advice from lawyers?
I’m shocked. Shocked I tell you.
Next you’ll tell me they have an HR department and a budget for advertising.
Why is it the government is so keen for students to hear „offensive“ views in university but when it comes to student protests not so much.
If you want freedom of speech then you have to let people express freedom of speech.
Strictly speaking, they don’t even need injunctions.
Universities are private property, trespassers who refuse to leave private property when asked can be removed using reasonable force.
Universities only go down the injunction route because using campus security to drag all the protesters out would be a PR nightmare.
The headline is odd. Why emphasise or even mention it is a British law firm? It is not as if British universities would take advice from Norweigan lawyers. Has the Guardian got AI writing its headlines?
As for the substance, it’s a bit of a nothingburger, especially since it took three journalists and a pressure group alongside the Guardian to write it. A law firm which acted for one university then advertised its services to others. Hold the front page.