Cairn shows the way when it comes to planning for protest

The circumstances of Greenpeace's protest have been well reported. Profile was clearly the objective here - Greenpeace apparently supplied video footage of the demonstration to the BBC, while photographs of protesters dressed as polar bears hit news desks around the country.

Although an interim interdict was quickly granted preventing publication of any material taken by protesters, footage and photographs of the protest were uploaded to Greenpeace's website, Twitter and Facebook and went viral before it could be locked down.

Despite this, the publicity could have been far worse. Cairn should take credit for the fact that the demonstration seems to have been remarkably well handled - doubtless the result of careful planning.

When protests occur, there are numerous practical issues that arise. Imagine the scene: it was reported that protesters breached security at Cairn's offices and started handing out leaflets encouraging them to become whistle blowers. Demonstrators also reportedly searched drawers and filing cabinets.

Things can get heated, and that can result in even worse publicity. That's why it's important for organisations to have a plan in place setting out the action which employees can - or just as importantly must not - take in relation to protesters.

It is probably not necessary for individual employees to be familiar with the detail of the plan, but there must be someone in charge who can ensure compliance with the plan, provide for the protection of employees, and prevent employees themselves taking steps to remove the protesters (almost always ill-advised).

There are additional signs of careful planning: it was reported that some of Cairn's non- essential staff were asked to work from home, for instance.

Similarly, a swift "dual action" was taken to win civil and criminal protections for the organisation.

According to reports, the police removed the protesters from Cairn's offices in small groups and 17 were later charged and appeared in court the following day. They are to reappear in court in October and November.

The charges are against the protesters as individuals, and while it is apparently a condition of bail that they will not come within 300 metres of Cairn's office, prosecution and even conviction of these protesters does not offer Cairn protection against future protests. For these reasons, simultaneous civil steps have also been taken to prevent Greenpeace entering Cairn's office in the future and, secondly, from taking any action to disrupt or interfere with Cairn's business. Failure to comply with the terms of the interim interdict is likely to be contempt of court, which can result in a hefty fine.

There are additional orders that Cairn may have decided not to seek at this stage but may seek in the future. The current order will remain in force against Greenpeace until it is recalled or made permanent, giving Cairn comfort.

Cairn now has more to consider. A significant amount of management time is also likely to have been diverted to deal with the protest, the civil action and its aftermath. If any of the protesters plead not guilty to the charges and go to trial, then Cairn employees are likely to be required to give evidence, further involving company time.

Similarly, Cairn will doubtless be mulling the prospect of further direct action at its other facilities.

A demonstration around an oil rig rather than on Lothian Road might not be quite so high profile in that fewer are there to see it, but it brings its own issues in terms of health and safety considerations and jurisdictional issues.

That said, the management at Cairn has shown itself adept at forward planning, and planning is the key.

l Heidi Archibald is a senior associate in the litigation and dispute resolution practice at McGrigors