swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Utilities - From: 1995 To: 1995
This page lists 6 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Regina v Dovermoss Ltd Gazette, 15 March 1995; Times, 08 February 1995; [1995] Env L R 258
8 Feb 1995
CA
Environment, Utilities, Crime
Contamination below the maximum set limits can still be pollution. A dry watercourse is controlled water, as are streams and drains. Pollution is an ordinary English word defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as 'to make physically impure, foul or filthy, to dirty, stain, taint or re-foul'. It is therefore not necessary to show that water is harmed to show that it is polluted.
Water Resources Act 1991 85(1)
1 Citers
Regina v Director General of Electricity Supply, Ex Parte Redrow Homes (Northern) Ltd Times, 21 February 1995
21 Feb 1995
QBD
Judicial Review, Utilities
There was no time limit on the age of a dispute for the Director General to take on the resolution of the dispute.
Electricity Act 1989
Norweb Plc v Dixon Times, 24 February 1995; [1995] 1 WLR 636
24 Feb 1995
QBD
Crime, Contract, Utilities
Electric supply was not made under a contract properly so called, and no offence was committed of harassment for payment. If there is a statutory obligation to enter into a form of agreement the terms of which are laid down, at any rate in their most important respects, there is no contract
Administration of Justice Act 1970 40(1)
1 Citers
Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Ex Parte Friends of the Earth and Another Times, 08 June 1995; Independent, 07 June 1995
7 Jun 1995
CA
Environment, Utilities, European
The Secretary of State can accept an undertaking from water companies instead of making an order to satisfy the obligations under the European directives.
Water Industry Act 1991 68(1)(a)
Commission v Luxembourg C-220/94; [1995] EUECJ C-220/94
15 Jun 1995
ECJ
Utilities
ECJ In order to ensure that directives are fully applied in fact as well as in law, Member States must provide a precise legal framework in the field in question, by adopting rules of law capable of creating a situation which is sufficiently precise, clear and transparent to allow individuals to know their rights and rely on them before the national courts.
Even supposing that the "General Conditions for Telecommunications Services" adopted and published by the public postal and telecommunications undertaking of a Member State have a content which complies with Directive 92/44 on the application of open network provision to leased lines, they cannot be regarded as ensuring an adequate transposition of that directive where it is apparent that that Member State has not adopted within the prescribed period the provisions needed to oblige that undertaking to comply with the requirements of the directive and to put individuals in a position to know the full extent of their rights under the directive and rely on them, if necessary, before the national courts.
[ Bailii ]
Greenpeace and others v Commission T-585/93; [1995] EUECJ T-585/93
9 Aug 1995
ECFI
European, Utilities, Environment
ECJ 1. Persons other than the addressees may claim that a decision is of individual concern to them only if that decision affects them by reason of certain attributes which are peculiar to them, or by reason of factual circumstances which differentiate them from all other persons and thereby distinguish them individually in the same way as the person addressed. The criterion thereby applied, which requires a combination of circumstances sufficient for the third-party applicant to be able to claim that he is affected by the contested decision in a manner which differentiates him from all other persons, remains applicable whatever the nature, economic or otherwise, of the interests affected.
Even on the assumption that, where interests linked to environmental protection are involved, the mere existence of harm suffered or to be suffered can give rise to an interest in bringing an action for annulment, that harm cannot confer locus standi on an applicant if it is such as to affect, generally and in the abstract, a large number of persons who cannot be determined in advance in a way which distinguishes them individually in the same way as the addressee of a decision. That conclusion cannot be affected by the fact that in the practice of national courts in matters relating to environmental protection locus standi may depend merely on the applicants' having a "sufficient" interest, since locus standi under the fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty depends on meeting the conditions relating to the applicant' s being directly and individually affected by the contested decision.
2. As regards persons who rely only on their position as residents in the area of those power stations, fishermen, farmers or persons concerned by the consequences which those facilities might have on local tourism, on the health of residents and on the environment, a decision addressed to a Member State granting financial assistance from the European Regional Development Fund for the construction of two power stations is a measure whose effects are likely to impinge on, objectively, generally and in the abstract, various categories of person and in fact any person residing or staying temporarily in the area concerned. It does not, therefore, affect them by reason of certain attributes which differentiate them from any other person who is, or might be in the future, in the same situation, and is thus not of individual concern to them within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty.
3. The granting of financial assistance from the European Regional Development Fund does not comprise any specific procedures whereby individuals may be associated with the adoption, implementation and monitoring of decisions taken in that field. Merely submitting a complaint relating to funding which is envisaged and subsequently exchanging correspondence with the Commission cannot therefore give a complainant locus standi to bring an action under Article 173 of the Treaty against a financing decision which was not addressed to him and which does not concern him individually as if it had been addressed to him.
4. An association formed for the protection of the collective interests of a category of persons cannot be considered to be individually concerned for the purposes of the fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty by a measure affecting the general interests of that category, and is therefore not entitled to bring an action for annulment where its members may not do so individually. However, special circumstances such as the role played by an association in a procedure which led to the adoption of an act within the meaning of Article 173 of the Treaty may justify holding admissible an action brought by an association whose members are not directly and individually concerned by the contested measure. There are no such circumstances in the case of an environmental protection association seeking to bring an action for the annulment of a Commission decision addressed to a Member State granting financial assistance from the European Regional Development Fund for the construction of two power stations, which relies for that purpose on an exchange of correspondence and a meeting with the Commission in that connection. Such contacts do not enable such an association to rely on an individual interest where the Commission did not, prior to the adoption of the contested decision, initiate any procedure in which the association was recognized as an interlocutor and where the contacts were for purposes of information only, since the Commission was under no duty either to consult or to hear the association before adopting its decision.
[ Bailii ]
