IGas granted injunction for three exploration sites

180804 owl day at Misson 2 FFM

Shale gas protest at the IGas Springs Road site at Misson, Nottinghamshire. Photo: Frack Free Mission, 4 August 2018

A judge at the High Court in London has granted an interim injunction to IGas for sites in the East Midlands and Cheshire.

The draft order, published online on the IGas website, covers sites at Springs Road and Tinker Lane in north Nottinghamshire and at Ellesmere Port in Cheshire.

The interim injunction was granted by Mr Justice Morgan, who recent granted a similar injunction to Ineos. This is now the subject of a case at the Court of Appeal.

The IGas injunction was considered at a private hearing on 31 August 2018 and granted on Monday 3 September 2018.

It covers three categories of “persons unknown”. It prohibits:

  • Trespass on IGas land
  • Unlawful interference with access to IGas land
  • Obstruction of the highway on specified exclusion zones, including by slow walking, lock-on and lorry surfing protests

The court order states that any breach of the injunctions is a contempt of court which could lead to imprisonment, fines or seizure of assets.

A statement from IGas said the injunction “does not prevent anyone effectively exercising their rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression”.

The order will be considered again at a hearing on Tuesday 2 October 2018.

People who wish to challenge the injunction should send evidence to the court and serve it on IGas by 4pm on Friday 14 September 2018.

Stephen Bowler, chief executive of IGas, said:

“We have given careful consideration to seeking this interim injunction as we fully respect the right to lawful and peaceful protest.  However, there have been a number of incidents where activists are putting themselves and others at risk and we have a duty of care to take the appropriate steps to ensure the safety and wellbeing of everyone in and around our sites.

“We are pleased that the High Court has granted this interim injunction which gives assurance to employees, contractors, suppliers and the general public that they can go about their lawful business safely and without the risk of harm resulting from any unlawful activity undertaken by activists.”

The court required IGas to serve the order by notices at the site and leaving copies at protest camps at Misson Springs and Tinker Lane.

The company is also permitted to serve the notice on an agreed list of organisations and groups by email, private message, website contact forms, Twitter or Facebook.

The shale gas sites at Misson and Tinker Lane are currently preparing for drilling. The first borehole is due to be drilled at Tinker Lane in the final quarter of this year, IGas said in  a trading update last month.

Testing gas flow at the existing borehole at Ellesmere Port site was refused planning permission in January 2018. IGas has appealed and the application will be heard at a public inquiry at a date and venue still to be confirmed.

Should this latest injunction be unchallenged or approved, it will be the fifth granted to onshore oil and gas companies in the UK in the past year. Oil and gas sites are currently covered by injunctions granted to Ineos (23 November 2018), Cuadrilla (extended in July 2018), UKOG (3 September 2018) and Europa (extended for 14 hours on 4 September 2018).

41 replies »

  1. Jack, young man, you need to check up on how pension funds investments are managed. Absolutely nothing to do with the employers, politicians or trade unions. I think Maxwell was the last straw in that respect. Virtue signalling is not going to change anything.

    They are independently managed and any change in investment direction would also need to be agreed by existing pensioners and those contributing prior to retirement. You will find the majority will make their decisions based upon returns and security and any risk to either will be rejected. Conflating what an individual may do with their pension to fulfill their slant upon life and what is acceptable to the majority in an employees scheme is silly.

    Based upon the tracking survey at least two thirds would not mind investment into fracking, if it has been giving decent returns and security.

    [Comment edited at poster’s request]

  2. SORRY MARTIN , exactly what tracking survey are you talking about ??????

    What TWO THIRDS don’t mind if their pension funds are invested in to Fracking ???

    Please show members of this forum.

    Now as we all now know, the said pension funds were invested in to large Oil companies like BP …. WHO incidently were smart enough to see that Fracking is a NON starter in the UK and that public opinion is strongly against it ..

    Although the likes of BP have Fracking projects in other countries, they are as I say, smart enough not to bite the hand that feeds them in the UK….. It’s quite acceptable to understand why UK Councils which are strongly against Fracking, were not fully aware where their pension money was being used . Especially when it’s being used abroad .

    NOW that they are aware , they can use their large amounts of invested money as a lever to put pressure on these companies , or they can can move their money to more ethical pension fund managers .

    I think MARTIN you will find that the vast majority of people are now taking Climate Change very seriously.. .. They DO care where their money is invested . Their childrens and grandchildrens future is of greater importance ..

    Regarding Oil investments …….There are other safe places to invest your pension fund money

    • There is not one Local Council that has said they will take their part of the £9,000,000,000 investment out of Fracking…

  3. Sorry Jack, you are simply wrong. Pension funds are the funds for pensioners. The employers (maybe a Council) pay some money in but it is for the pensioners, the employees and the INDEPENDENT fund manager and Trustees to decide how and where that money is invested. Some of those Trustees will usually be nominated by the employer but only some.

    Two thirds of those surveyed every quarter (up to now) within the UK are not against fracking, so the likelihood of that being reversed within an individual situation would be quite difficult to envisage. Council employees pensions are NOT at the whim of a Council. Heaven help the employees if they were-for many Councils the biggest investment decision they get right is whether to have chocolate or rich tea biscuits in their meetings. And even that is open to debate.

    I think you will find Jack that most pensioners would not expect their children or grand children to have to fund their old age if they had messed up their pension provision. Their children and grand children will be too consumed with dealing with their own finances, such as repayment of student debt.

    • MARTIN we have endlessly been through this topic .

      TWO THIRDS of those unfortunate enough, to live within 5 MILES of a Fracking site are saying NO.

      66% of Lancashire residents oppose fracking near their homes – new survey

      Even the eye watering offer of £ 150 to 95+ % of the residents couldn’t tempt them …….

      Nationally though ONLY 18 % support and 32% are AGAINST Fracking ……. As the DECC Public Attitude Tracker shows , the majority of the undecided , are undecided because they are not aware of the process ….

      BOY are they going to be in for a surprise when they’re made fully aware of the process . The NO to Fracking will be a resounding one .

        • Pension Fund Managers will always be mindful of public opinion, just as the BIG players like BP are .

          BP don’t invest in UK Fracking because they see the UK public don’t want it.

          Now that it’s been made public where some pension money is being invested by Fund Managers ….. Let’s see what happens now …… Only suicidal Pension Fund Managers will continue with the current stratagy …

          WORLD’S LARGEST OFFSHORE WIND FARM OPENS TODAY ( UK ) ………..MAYBE from now on, Pension Fund Managers will be looking for investing in UK Offshore Wind Farms .

          Walney £1bn offshore wind farm is world’s largest

          • Repeating your statement that “BP don’t invest in UK Fracking because they see the UK public don’t want it” still doesn’t make it true. If bp thought that investing in UK onshore fracking gave them a greater financial return than other projects, they would certainly do it.

          • Or Danish owned UK wind farms?

            Any company with UK petrol stations etc. will be unlikely to invest in UK onshore at the exploration stage. They don’t want their petrol stations / distribution centers blockaded by swampies. Easy targets.

            BP just bought back it’s US Eagleford shale portfolio from BHP at at 90% discount so they are again a serious player.

          • Walney extension is a good deal for investors who trade on the Danish Nasdaq. It is only a bad deal for UK citizens who consume and pay for the electricity. Walney extensiom CFD strike price is £150 / MWhr. The whole sale price of electricity in the UK today is around £35 / MWhr. Not to worry though, if the electricity wholesale price goes above £150 then the Danes have to pay us back the difference. Brilliant deal!

            A “no brainer” for pension funds…..

  4. Oh Jack. So you did know the source for my reference! Interesting. Two shifts, or just an attempt to divert?

    Pension fund managers may of course change strategy BUT that will be governed (fortunately) by the Trustees who will need to take account of the pensioners requirements-current and future. They will be able to check where their pension fund is invested. It really is nothing to do with the public. Would you like the public dictating where your money was invested? Remember, they won’t pick up the tabs if things go wrong and two thirds of the one third who are anti fracking are not well informed on the subject. Not a sound base for your investment decisions to be made upon.

    I know maths. is difficult for the antis., but to keep it simple, if 66 out of 100 were not against CURRENT investment into a particular sector that was performing as required to support their pensions do you believe there would be a vote to change? Not in the real world.

    Maybe if a pension fund was applied in a small radius around a fracking site then Nimbyism may become a factor but otherwise it has no relevance. Equally, PNR would already indicate those in a small radius around a fracking site are quite willing to accept income from it. Neither does the opening of a wind farm. If that wind farm shows high and secure returns to investors over a prolonged period then it might.

    Individuals can take control of their own pension funds and that is quite different. It is also where a lot of people find their own choices cost them during retirement.

    Maybe employers should offer a choice to their employees where their funds are invested, either the Company standard or more weighted to their own view of the world? Well, Jack, they do. You can opt out and do your own thing. On balance, the people I know who have done the latter are not happy now they did so, but there will be some who are.

    • MARTIN,

      I’m sorry the maths is complicated for some to understand, so I will make this very simple.

      18 % support Fracking
      32 % are against Fracking

      That leaves 50 % undecided AT THE MOMENT……. As and when Fracking companies try and impose this industry on communities AGAINST the will of the people……… The people quickly become up to speck on the process , as with the Lancashire residents

      66 % of people in LANCASHIRE are AGAINST Fracking .

      This figure will of course become higher as MORE and MORE people familiarise themselves with the process .

      NOW if I , or anyone with a BRAIN between their EARS had , let’s say £ 1 billion to invest in a Pension Investment Company, I would want to FULLY know where my money was going ……… WOULD I blindly trust a person / persons with that amount of money, the answer would be a resounding NO.

      MARTIN, trying to make excuses as to why people should be completely devoid of simple common sense by not asking or wanting to know where their money will be used , is stupid beyond reason .

      For all we know, a Pension Investment Company may be HOPING to meet our future pension payments , making gains on the spin of a Roulette Wheel.

      OR MAYBE my pension will be paid as a result of investments in to companies that exploit CHILD LABOUR , or companies that KILL endangered wildlife, like ELEPHANTS / RHINOS grinding their horns for medicine, OR MAYBE they will be investing it in to something that is proving to be as equally unpopular and environmentally damaging like FRACKING.

      ALL OF THE ABOVE are deeply unpopular with the people and ANY person with above Earthworm intelligence should know that investing in deeply unpopular projects is NOT a safe place for their money ….

      HIGH RISK can indeed mean HIGH GAINS, but HIGH RISK can also mean HIGH LOSSES…

      INVESTORS should also have a moral and ethical compass . It’s not all about the money MARTIN, or are you saying that we should stick TWO FINGERS FIRMLY in the faces of our children and grandchildren by wrecking the planet for OUR own short term greedy gains ???????

  5. What on earth was that about Jack?

    Who suggested people should be or are unable to know where their pension money is invested? Not me. I made the point if two thirds of them bothered and found out it was with companies who were involved in fracking, as long as it was giving them the financial outcome they wanted they would not be inclined to be worried about it. If they were, they would say they were against fracking-only one third said that.

    They can indicate they want investment strategy changed but it takes more than that before it does, and certainly is not under the control of the employer. And rightly so.

    If people are not against fracking, and investment in fracking in their pensions is happening and giving a good level of return why would they want it to change???? Question asked repeatedly, but you can’t answer it so go into fog mode.

    You completely made up that people, generally, are against fracking in the UK. They are not. For those that are they can make their own individual choice regarding their pension provision. But, you also need to remember in most pension schemes there are many more pensioners who have long retired than there are currently contributing and they have a habit of not wanted to change investment strategy for them if it is working currently. Some of these may be having to fund £4-£5k/month in care costs in their final years. You volunteer you will make sure they can continue to do that rather them run the risk their level of care will be unaffordable. That might convince them, but I doubt it.

    Fracking is not deeply unpopular with the UK public. If you have to keep repeating a fictitious claim to justify your beliefs there is something wrong with your judgement. Make your own investment decisions by all means but don’t try and force them upon others. Unless you are very good at making those decisions it will be a disaster, especially when you have such difficulty between what is reality and what is not.


      NO, NO, NO

      YOU talk about the TWO THIRDS NOT being bothered if their money is invested in to Fracking Companies.. That’s YOUR opinion ONLY…….. YOU offer SWEET NOTHING to back up that statement

      AGAIN I SAY, it’s only YOUR OPPINION .

      I have presented FACTS to show the general trend towards Fracking ….. TIME and TIME again the People and Councils are giving a resounding NO to Fracking ……. SURLELY for the most simplest of life forms it would be as clear as the nose on their face …… Backing Fracking is like backing a Three Legged Horse

      MOVING ON………..

      YOU SAID …….. Quote 6th September 2018 regarding Pension Investment Money, it is , ” Absolutely nothing to do with the employers.”

      The point I try to make is ,…… YES it is everything to do with the employers and employees, they have a RIGHT to know exactly when and where their money is going .

      When an employer is responsible for the pensions of 10s of thousands of employees and £100s millions. The employer should be kept FULLY up to spec , especially if their money is being invested in highly controversial and deeply unpopular projects

      LETS NOT FORGET……….. CONSIDERING MOST pension funds are running HUGE deficits, It’s beginning to look like Pension Fund Managers couldn’t organise a P_SS UP in a Brewary .

      I SAY AGAIN , it’s absolutely everything to do with the employers, they have a duty of care and responsibility for their employees

      You concern for the pensioners £4k – £5k a month care costs are quite rightly justified , but that should not mean that their care costs are met at the expense and misery of millions of others . What I say is that Pension Investment Companies should make sure that their investments are

      (A) Ethical
      ( B ) DO NOT exploit child labour or wildlife.
      ( C ) DO NOT profit of the destruction of OTHER people’s land, where ever they may be on the planet
      ( D ) DO NOT profit at the expense of severe / dangerous climate change .

      IF pension investment companies can’t make profits without taking note of the above , then they shouldn’t be in business

      • NOW that the people and Councils have been made aware, that their Pension Funds are being invested in Fracking projects abroad…. They are one by one , lining up to give a resounding NO .

  6. Jack-you are a hopeless case!

    Nothing to do with “the people” and only partly to do with the Council. You really have difficulty grasping simple concepts. Shout and scream all you like but the fundamentals stay the same. It is not everything to do with the employer-absolute nonsense. A pension scheme BY LAW has to be independent of the employer, hence a group of Trustees, who are obliged to act in the best FINANCIAL interests of the fund members, often against the interests of the employers. If fund members don’t think the Trustees are doing that, they can vote them out and have them replaced. I have such pensions, you obviously don’t. I would suggest you research the subject a bit more.

    A pensioner can pay into a scheme for 40 years plus and then draw from it probably another 30 years. Very unlikely an employer would have any degree of stability over that time, hence the need for independence and a Trustee system.

    Sorry, but you really are confusing your ideals with reality. But that’s what antis do.


      YOU really are having difficulty in grasping this one arn’t you ??????

      You need to READ THE POSTS a little better …. If you don’t understand , please ask, I can help .

      Whether a pension firm operates independent from an employer or not, is not in question here …..

      What is in question, is WHERE pension fund money is used and yes , when a an employer is responsible £100s Millions for thousands of employees , they SHOULD have direct knowledge as to where that money is used .

      YOU KNOW MARTIN ……… Talking about not knowing where your pension money is . They had a big problem with that in America . With organised crime and OTHERS putting their sticky fingers in to the pension fund pots of ordinary workers ….. Look where the TEAMSTERS Pension Fund ended up .

      Whether the pension investment firm operates on planet Earth or the Moon
      Whether someone pays in to a pension scheme for one day or a century is irrelevant , what the money is used for whilst they are paying in is of the utmost importance .

      YOU SAY , I’M A ” HOPELESS CASE ” well MARTIN that’s your “opinion ”

      As with all your posts ,, ” opinions ” they are never backed up with any supporting evidence . EVER …….. Therefore I will and others will take with a pinch of salt the opinion of one Man or Woman , whichever you may be .

  7. Although we argue intensely MARTIN , I do respect you and bid you no ill feeling…

    We are probably very much aligned with our views on many other things in life , Fracking apart .

    I look forward to our strong Fracking debates next week.

    Best wishes for the weekend , your adversary…… jackthelad

  8. Jack-you are fun to discuss things with, but you really need to stick to the subject and discuss what is stated rather than change what is stated by the other party to ease your discussion!

    Pension funds should be controlled by those whose money it is-ie. the employees and the pensioners. Most of them lack the experience to do so and that is just one of the reasons why Trustees are appointed to manage the funds. Those employees and pensioners usually have detailed information on a regular basis from the Pension Fund regarding investment policy and performance. They can contact that Board at any time and request further information, if they want. They can change the Trustees if they want.They can opt out of that Scheme at the start if they don’t like the investment policy, and do something different. Usually, if things don’t look as they would wish after some period they can do the same. As they come to retirement, if they don’t like to continue in that Scheme they can take the money out and do their own thing.

    In other words, the people who have that pension scheme already have the ability to access it in terms of what it is doing. They also have the ability to decide they don’t like the look of it, for whatever reason, and get out. There will be individuals who have disquiet about a lot of things, based upon facts or not. They can exercise that disquiet. It does not mean every minority disquiet should be imposed upon the majority.

    It should be nobody else’s responsibility to impose that upon them, and certainly not the employers. Remember, the Trustees will want the employers to maintain the funds to meet forward liabilities. If those Trustees have been excessively limited in their investment strategy and those funds are then insufficient how will that work? Increase in local taxation is how it would work. Okay, so let a Council flag this up to the community before hand and get an instruction, rather than virtue signal about matters without being honest about the implications. If they did that on the basis of the current poll data the majority of England would say that we are not against fracking, with a possible small NIMBY exception around individual sites. That would be the democratic outcome, so there is no issue here.

    Other than the antis thinking there is an opportunity to bully a few individuals into making incorrect and costly decisions outside of their competence. Wrong choice. Pensions are a far greater issue to the majority than energy bills.

    Have a good weekend. I will leave you to other things as I have nursing duty to concentrate upon for the next 48 hours.

    • Good morning MARTIN ,

      I hope your blood pressure , like mine has after a weekend respite from O&G debates . slightly lowered.

      Thanks for “once again” going into fine detail as to how Pension Fund management operates. It will of course help all interested parties reading this to understand better, the points I make.

      FIRST OF ALL ……. I agree , the employer and employees would not have the knowledge to manage/part manage their pension funds ……… BUT MORE transparency , would STOP money from pension funds propping up destructive industries…… YES , military arms , child sweatshops, Palm Oil plantations in rainforests may be profitable to share holders and pension fund companies . BUT AT WHAT PRICE do you want your money ??????

      Inevitably these destructive industries cost us ALL MONEY in the long run …..Councils that have £100s millions to invest , SHOULD BE MADE AWARE if their MONEY is going through the back door to prop up certain unethical industries.

      THESE Pension Fund Companies must of been LAUGHING DOWN THEIR SLEEVES, taking money from Councils, knowing that they were investing it in to industries that the Councils were fighting against .

      ((( It’s JUST AS CRAZY as having a Pension Fund Company, investing Pension money from GREENPEACE in to an Amazon Rainforest logging company. TOTALLY OUT OF ORDER )))

      YOU SAY that the ” employees and pensioners ” are able to obtain detailed information as to where there money is placed……… BUT just as with BP , you won’t find them putting that in to print for all to read , that money invested in their company is going in to FRACKING projects in other countries ….. They will be clever enough to omit that little detail from any inquisitive Pensioner.

      What the Pensioner might be told is just something like…….. OIL and GAS exploration / field.

      MORE TRANSPARENCY, is what is needed

Leave a Reply to Kisheny Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s