CA 2 December 1992. The respondents (S) were trespassers, occupying land owned by SDC, claiming to be gypsies within the meaning of the Caravan Sites Act 1968. S also claimed that SDC had not provided sites pursuant to their duty to do so under the Act. SDC applied for a possession order against S; S sought to have the application adjourned in order to seek judicial review of SDC`s decision to institute possession proceedings. An order for possession was granted against S. The occupiers appealed. On appeal, the county court judge found that there was no authorised site to which they could go, and the SDC contended that it was the responsibility of the county council to provide sites. The judge considered that the SDC must know of the county council`s shortage of sites and that there was nowhere for S to go, if evicted. Appeal allowed; adjournment granted to allow S to apply for judicial review. SDC appealed. Held, dismissing the appeal, that although a district council would best served ...