High Court judge REJECTS legal bid to overturn limits on numbers of people who can attend weddings after venue said it would cause ‘serious and irreparable harm’
- Weddings were postponed at the start of the pandemic, but resumed in August
- They were allowed to go ahead with 30 guests, but that was halved last month
- A High Court judge rejected attempts to lift restrictions, amid fears over venues
A legal bid to overturn limits on the number of people allowed to attend weddings has been rejected in the High Court, despite a venue warning it would cause ‘serious and irreparable harm’.
Cripps Barn Group Ltd, a wedding operator which runs a number of venues across England, asked for an injunction to prevent enforcement of the limit on numbers.
At the start of the coronavirus pandemic, all weddings were postponed by the Government – but they were eventually allowed to resume in August, albeit with a limit of 30 guests.
A High Court judge has rejected an appeal to lift a 15-person limit on wedding guests, brought in by the Government last month
When a nationwide 10pm curfew was brought into effect last month to curb a rise in Covid-19 cases, the Government also halved the number of permitted wedding attendants to 15 – but funerals were allowed up to 30 mourners.
Lawyers for Cripps argued at a hearing on Thursday that the regulations are unlawful and will cause the firm and other wedding venues to suffer ‘serious and irreparable harm’ if they continue to be enforced.
But the firm’s application for an injunction was rejected by Mr Justice Swift, who said the public interest in keeping the restrictions in place ‘outweighs’ the harm that will be suffered by venues.
The judge told the court: ‘I do not doubt the continuing damage to Cripps’ business by reason of the restriction on how many people may attend weddings and wedding receptions – that is a clear and present argument.
‘Moreover that is to be seen in the context of restrictions… having been in place since the end of March, and the cumulative impact of those restrictions on Cripps… must have been very severe indeed.
‘The restrictions have prejudiced every person and, I suspect, the vast majority of businesses.
‘But the public interest in maintaining the restriction… outweighs that indisputable harm.’
He added that the restriction on weddings was part of a ‘package’ aimed at suppressing transmission of the virus and therefore one rule could not be changed without ‘consequential changes to other measures in the scheme’.
The judge said the restrictions must remain in place ‘unless and until’ a court finds they are unlawful.
A High Court judge said the public interest in keeping the restrictions ‘outweighed,’ any impact on businesses. Earlier this month businessman Simon Dolan (pictured) launched a wider legal challenge, over the legality of Government measures
The application was made ahead of a wider legal challenge, launched earlier this month by Cripps along with businessman Simon Dolan, over the legality of Government measures aimed at reducing the spread of Covid-19.
It is the second High Court challenge Mr Dolan has brought against lockdown rules, the first having been dismissed in July.
The tycoon, who according to the Sunday Times Rich List is worth £200 million, will challenge that decision at a Court of Appeal hearing later this month.
No date has yet been set for the High Court to hear the joint challenge by Mr Dolan and Cripps.