Common law courts have struggled to offer a consistent basis for sentencing in cases concerning civil disobedience. This case note examines the recent Court of Appeal decision Cuadrilla Bowland Ltd v Persons Unknown, concerning individuals convicted of contempt for defying injunction orders to refrain from continuing their direct-action protests at a fracking site run by an oil company, with a view to immobilising its business operations. The note observes that the Court here offered a more coherent basis for sentencing principles concerning acts of civil disobedience and breaches of injunction orders. The rationales offered transcend traditional distinctions, relied on by some courts, between direct and indirect disobedience and between civil disobedience and contempt, which have brought about considerable analytical difficulties. The judgment further signifies a paradigm shift in the Court's approach to cases of civil disobedience – from emphasising ‘law and order’ to focussing on a ‘balance of rights’.

中文翻译：

---

重新考虑公民不服从案件中的量刑原则：Cuadrilla Bowland Ltd 和其他人诉未知人士和其他人

普通法法院一直在努力为公民不服从案件的判决提供一致的依据。本案例说明审查了上诉法院最近的判决Cuadrilla Bowland Ltd v Persons Unknown，涉及因藐视禁令而被定罪的个人，该禁令禁止在一家石油公司经营的水力压裂现场继续进行直接行动抗议，以阻止其业务运营。该说明指出，法院在此为关于公民不服从行为和违反禁令的行为的量刑原则提供了更加连贯的基础。所提供的理由超越了一些法院所依赖的传统区分直接和间接不服从以及公民不服从和蔑视之间的区别，这些区别带来了相当大的分析困难。该判决进一步标志着法院对公民不服从案件的处理方式发生了范式转变——从强调“法律和秩序”到关注“权利平衡”。