A high court judge has refused to grant a final injunction banning Travellers from stopping on vast swathes of public land, in a ruling that could have major implications on whether other local authorities are allowed such orders.

The London borough of Bromley obtained a de facto borough-wide injunction preventing people from camping on 171 parcels of land in August 2018. The campaign group London Gypsies and Travellers challenged this injunction, arguing it was a disproportionate and discriminatory response to the accommodation crisis of Gypsies and Travellers.

London Gypsies and Travellers said a serious shortage of authorised sites and stopping places had forced many Gypsies and Travellers on to unauthorised encampments.

Over the last two years more than 32 councils across England have obtained court injunction orders against “persons unknown” in a bid to reduce the number of unauthorised encampments. In London, 14 borough councils obtained temporary or permanent injunctions, which give councils powers to fine, imprison or seize the property of Gypsies and Travellers if they continue to camp on open land.

Leigh-Ann Mulcahy QC, deputy high court judge, refused to grant Bromley council a five-year injunction that prevented people from occupying public space, instead allowing a much more limited injunction preventing people from fly-tipping and depositing substantial amounts of waste.

The judgment could have major implications for other local authorities who have obtained, or are seeking, similar injunctions.

Marc Willers QC, representing London Gypsies and Travellers, argued in court that by getting an injunction against “persons unknown” and not specific individuals, it unfairly demonised all Gypsies and Travellers for the antisocial behaviour of a few.

Debby Kennett, chief executive of London Gypsies and Travellers, said she was delighted with the outcome. “The judge recognised that Gypsies and Travellers have been present in this country for hundreds of years and that their traditional way of life is protected under human rights and equalities law. She referred to the shortage of sites and stopping places and also the cumulative impact of these injunctions on the Gypsy and Traveller community across the country.”

Kennett added: “The judge also recognised that simply pushing families out of one area into another was not a solution and criticised Bromley for not considering alternatives.

“Her decision to reduce the scope of the injunction, to include just those depositing waste or fly-tipping and not simply those occupying the land, was very significant. It finally distinguishes the issue of roadside families’ accommodation need from the problems caused by those engaged in waste crime.”

Councillor Kate Lymer, portfolio holder for public protection and enforcement, said: “We will always look to exercise all our legal powers when taking action to stop illegal encampments and no one should be in any doubt that this will continue.

“We will carefully examine the full legal judgment, including the possibility of appealing this decision, but clearly we are disappointed that the court has not chosen to fully extend the interim injunction order following our previous successful interim application.”