The Court found that it was difficult to
envisage circumstances involving a larger disparity in bargaining power, particularly as Coles was in a substantially stronger bargaining position with respect to each supplier.
`... while Article 8 does apply in principle to cases
involving a private landowner and a trespasser, it is difficult to
envisage circumstances where it would have any consequence and the eviction would not be found to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim».