BAA used most of the morning to put forward their case. It basically boiled down to a couple of things. Firstly, BAA thinks that possible disruption caused by protests may highten the risk of 'Iraqi-style terrorism' at the airport. One of the examples the BAA laywer Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden used was that protesters might blockade cars going to the airport which in turn could 'exposing them to a terrorist strike'. He added: 'of course we see that in Baghdad every day'. Right.

The defence lawyer spent the afternoon putting forward that there are already far reaching laws in place as well as a competent police force who will be able to take care of such events. An injunction would just confuse the situation, rather than add to it. The laywer for Transport for London and the London Underground, agreed, urging the court to throw out the injunction, calling it 'neither necessary, desirable nor clear'.

Secondly, although BAA hinted yesterday that they might not seek an injunction for all members of organisations supporting the camp for climate action, it made it clear today that it is seeking to injunct the supporters besides the 4 named people on the injunction.

The judge, Mrs Justice Swift, said she will need the weekend to think things over, so a ruling can be expected on Monday morning. The hearing will continue today (Friday) in the morning, for a couple of hours.