What Constitutes Reasonable Force in Traveller and Trespasser Eviction Under Common Law?

The concept of ‘reasonable force’ in the context of traveller and trespasser eviction under common law is not explicitly defined in legislation.

Government guidance promotes the general principle that the use of force must be proportionate to the situation and necessary to prevent harm and enforce the law.

Government Guidance on Reasonable Force

The Government advises that the reasonableness of force depends on the circumstances of each case.

• Reasonable force is considered proportionate if it matches the severity of the threat or harm it aims to prevent.
• Importantly, the force used should be no more than what is necessary to achieve the desired outcome.

Key Aspects of Reasonable Force

1. Proportionality: The force applied must be in proportion to the threat or harm being addressed. Using excessive force, beyond what is necessary to neutralise the threat, is not deemed reasonable.
2. Necessity: The use of force must be necessary to accomplish a legitimate aim, such as protecting oneself or others from immediate danger or enforcing legal rights. If non-violent methods, such as negotiation or allowing more time, could effectively resolve the situation, then the use of force is not justified.
3. Context: Determining what constitutes reasonable force involves considering the specific circumstances of the case, including the level of threat, the behaviour of the individuals involved, and the options available at the time.
4. Perception: The assessment of reasonable force takes into account what a reasonable person in the same situation would believe to be necessary and appropriate.

Legal Considerations

Reasonable force is typically evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the courts, which will consider all relevant factors to determine whether the force used was justified. For example:

Greater force may be justified if someone is defending themselves against an armed attacker compared to an unarmed threat.

While law enforcement officers have some discretion in using force, they are still held to standards of reasonableness based on their training and the specific situation they face.

In common law evictions against travellers or trespassers, bailiffs act as the landlord’s agents rather than as court officers. Therefore, they must exercise caution and limit the use of force to what is deemed reasonable under the circumstances. For example:

Without a court order, bailiffs cannot break locks, forcefully enter vehicles, tow vehicles away with people inside, or remove clamps.

Practical Application

In practice, what constitutes reasonable force is judged by the specific circumstances of each case. Force may be applied to vehicles, individuals, or barriers that have been erected to hinder eviction efforts.

Using force against individuals carries the highest risk and is usually only justifiable in self-defence. It is important to ensure that the situation is well-managed to protect the safety of everyone involved.

When dealing with vehicles, reasonable force would generally not involve towing them in the usual manner. However, using force against obstacles is typically permissible.

Bailiffs, acting on behalf of the landlord, are limited to using only reasonable force to carry out the eviction.

It is important to note that any excessive force or actions leading to an affray could result in arrest under Section 3 of the Public Order Act 1986. Additionally, the landlord could be held criminally and civilly responsible for such actions.

Court Orders and the Use of Force

While common law allows for direct eviction without a court order, this approach is often scrutinised by the courts. The judicial perspective tends to favour less violent methods of gaining possession, such as obtaining a court order. Although these methods may be less convenient, quicker, or cheaper, they are generally preferred. The case of Burton v Winters [1993] 1 WLR 1077 underscores this preference.

Obtaining an order for possession from the County Court and having it transferred to the High Court as a Writ of Possession can provide additional options for enforcement.

A High Court Enforcement Officer (HCEO) can then assemble a team and invoke the powers under section 99 of the Courts Act, which obliges any Police constable to assist in the execution of the writ. This approach is particularly important when using force to gain entry, ensuring compliance with section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1977.

Summary

Whilst reasonable force can be used in traveller and trespasser evictions under common law, it must always be carefully assessed and proportionate to the situation to avoid legal repercussions.

We can help

Act fast and hire a professional enforcement company to use common law or other enforcement methods as soon as possible.

read more about the
Traveller Eviction
service

Who do we work for?

We carry out work for local authorities, Government departments, businesses, property managing agents, and individuals.

About the author

This article was written by Andrew Coates, Authorised High Court Enforcement Officer and full member of The High Court Enforcement Officers Association, and current CEO of Quality Bailiffs.

Andy has a Level 4 diploma in High Court Enforcement, and over twenty five years of experience in the bailiff and investigation industry. He is a former governing council member of both CIVEA and ABI.

This article does not constitute receiving professional advice legal or otherwise, and is meant for educational purposes only. All information is provided in good faith and is used at the user’s own risk. Enforcement Bailiffs Ltd, or its employees, are not qualified or insured to give legal advice and all clients should satisfy themselves of their own legal position before using or proceeding with any of the suggestions, strategies or procedures contained in this guide, and before instructing us.

read more eviction articles