Oxford University's complaints that contractors at its new £20m animal research lab were being harassed and intimidated were "exaggerated", a judge heard yesterday.

Robert Cogswell, one of the founding members of campaign group Speak, said all he and the group's members wanted was to peacefully protest against what he termed the "animal abuse lab".

Mr Cogswell was giving evidence at the High Court in London against the university's bid to extend current injunctions over protests against the building of the research lab in South Parks Road.

Speak's members, he told the judge, had been "tarred with the brush" of a few extremists and had not been engaged in sending hate mail, abusive emails or other forms of harassment.

He also denied they were involved in "some sort of covert operation" to identify and intimidate contractors to discourage them from working on the site.

The university has asked Mr Justice Holland to widen an existing exclusion zone around the lab in which anything other than strictly controlled protests are banned.

Charles Flint, for the university, is also seeking a wide range of orders against protesters, including a complete ban on photography and use of megaphones around the laboratory site.

He said staff, students and workers were being harassed and intimidated by the protesters' actions.

Arguing a photography ban would be "absurd", Mr Cogswell said campaigners wanted "a historic record of what is going on". He recognised that, as anti-vivisectionists, Speak members had few friends in the area and told the judge: "I think they would only be happy if we were expelled from Oxford altogether."

When Mr Cogswell also argued protesters should not be banned from using a megaphone, Mr Justice Holland remarked that it was "probably a bit wearing" for office workers to hear the word "scum" repeated over and over again at high volume.

Mr Cogswell agreed that inappropriate language had occasionally been used and said: "I do appreciate that calling people 'scum' is not going to make any friends".

Mr Justice Holland said: "I do think it is a great pity that legitimate protesters are being tarred with the brush of a few extremists".

Mr Flint told the judge the university only wished to extend the exclusion zone between 100 and 200 metres to "minimise the potential for flashpoints" to ban photography from being used as a means of intimidation and to reduce noise levels in specific streets. An injunction, he said, would give the university the added protection that protestors who breached the court order could be arrested and prosecuted under anti-harassment legislation.

A further hearing is expected on Wednesday, with Mr Justice Holland's ruling expected then or on Thursday.

Meanwhile, an Oxford don has claimed the university and the city are "under siege" from animal rights activists campaigning against the laboratory.

Speaking in a radio interview, Prof Colin Blakemore, who is chief executive of the Medical Research Council, issued an attack against the campaigners who protest outside the laboratory site every Thursday afternoon.

He said: "What the university is seeking to stop here is the growth of a mood of violent and aggressive protest against the university and everyone associated with the university.

"Agreed, nobody is comfortable with the idea of restrictions of freedom of expression of opinion. It's not really aimed at that.

"It's not attempting to stop all demonstration. It's just looking for a reasonable balance and relief for the university and the city from the constant har- assment."

Laurie Pycroft, who founded the pro animal testing group Pro-Test, backed Prof Blakemore, but said to describe the situation as a siege environment was incorrect.

He said: "There is most definitely a climate of fear used by the animal rights movement, but this will change over the next few months to being in favour of animal research and open debate."