Saturday 21 October 2017

Harrods in Gaga protest court win

Lady Gaga arriving for a signing session of her fragrance 'Fame' at Harrods in Knightsbridge
Lady Gaga arriving for a signing session of her fragrance 'Fame' at Harrods in Knightsbridge

One of the world's most famous department stores has won a legal fight with fur trade protesters after complaining that families were "harassed" when pop star Lady Gaga visited to advertise perfume.

A High Court judge tightened restrictions on protests outside Harrods in Knightsbridge, London, after being told that demonstrators had caused a "nuisance" during Lady Gaga's appearance in October 2012.

Mr Justice Globe concluded that existing restrictions on protests did not provide "sufficient protection". The judge issued a written ruling after a High Court hearing in London in May.

Harrods' bosses had complained about the behaviour of protesters during Lady Gaga's visit on October 7. Mr Justice Globe said the star had visited the store to "advertise some perfumery".

"It is Harrods' case that the (protesters) positioned themselves at the front of the crowds with banners and placards, in and amongst families and children, causing a nuisance, annoyance and harassment to members of the public in attendance enjoying the event," said the judge.

"From statements, photographs and CCTV evidence, I have a very clear understanding of the nature of the event and what happened on this occasion."

He said Harrods had also complained about protesters' behaviour on Boxing Day 2012 - the first day of the store's winter sale. The judge said anti-fur trade campaigners began demonstrations outside Harrods in 2005. Store bosses launched legal action shortly afterwards and court injunctions were subsequently issued, amended and extended.

Harrods took legal action against animal rights campaigner Brendan McNally and the Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade.

Mr Justice Globe said Mr McNally acted in person at the hearing and had "formulated intelligent and intelligible" submissions on behalf of protesters. The judge said Mr McNally disagreed with the way protesters had been portrayed.

"He relies upon the fact that there have been no convictions of any protesters over the whole time of the order. He therefore argues that they have behaved responsibly and exercised their rights peacefully within the ambit of the current order," said Mr Justice Globe.

Press Association

Editors Choice

Also in World News