Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Daventry District Council ex parte Thornby Farms: Admn 28 Jul 2000

The council granted licences for the disposal of waste animal carcasses by incineration. The objectors said the council had failed to take note of art 4 of the directive, and that as clinical waste alternative regimes applied. Held: Animal waste and clinical waste were properly distinguished, and the council had applied the correct guidance. The … Continue reading Regina v Daventry District Council ex parte Thornby Farms: Admn 28 Jul 2000

Thornby Farms Ltd, Murray v Daventry District Council, Derbyshire County Council: CA 22 Jan 2002

Two parties appealed against the grant of licences for plants for the disposal of animal carcasses. The plants would increase the amount of emissions into the environment. Held: An objective was different to a material consideration. An objective was something to be kept in mind at all stages of an assessment, and even when considering … Continue reading Thornby Farms Ltd, Murray v Daventry District Council, Derbyshire County Council: CA 22 Jan 2002

Commission of the European Communities v Grand-duche de Luxembourg: ECJ 15 Jan 2002

ECJ 1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 8 May 2001, the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 226 EC for a declaration that the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ … Continue reading Commission of the European Communities v Grand-duche de Luxembourg: ECJ 15 Jan 2002

Commission v United Kingdom: ECJ 24 Jan 2002

Europa Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Environment – Waste -Directives – Waste management plans. ‘The United Kingdom does not dispute its alleged failure to meet its obligations. It admits that, during the period under consideration, it failed to adopt and/or notify waste management plans capable of covering the entire territory … Continue reading Commission v United Kingdom: ECJ 24 Jan 2002

Regina v Environment Agency ex parte Dockgrange Limited and Mayer Parry Limited: Admn 22 May 1997

The verb ‘discard’ in the Waste Framework Directive has a special and limited meaning which requires the materials to be subjected to a disposal or recovery operation. Carnwath J said: ‘The general concept is now reasonably clear. The term discard is used in a broad sense equivalent to ‘get rid of’. The phrase get rid … Continue reading Regina v Environment Agency ex parte Dockgrange Limited and Mayer Parry Limited: Admn 22 May 1997

Thames Water Utilities Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Water Services Regulation Authority: QBD 28 Jul 2008

Whether escapes of waste water from a public sewerage system are ‘Directive waste’ within the scope of the Waste Framework Directive, and thus subject to the enforcement authority of the Environment Agency under section 33 of the 1990 Act. Held: Sewage which escaped from a public sewer was controlled waste. Judges: Lord Justice Carnwarth and … Continue reading Thames Water Utilities Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Water Services Regulation Authority: QBD 28 Jul 2008

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 5 of 2000): CACD 6 Jun 2001

Waste products could become ‘controlled waste’ and subject to licensing procedures without there being a recovery or disposal operation being involved. A rendering process produced a condensate which the company wished to spread on farm land without a licence. The company had argued that no recovery process was involved, and therefore it was not waste … Continue reading Attorney-General’s Reference (No 5 of 2000): CACD 6 Jun 2001

The Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Parkwood Landfill Limited: ChD 29 Jan 2002

The fact that waste deposited, was yet capable of being recycled, did not of itself prevent its deposit being subject to landfill tax. The local authority took waste highways material to the respondent’s landfill site. Some was capable of being resold. The tribunal had held that this was not a disposal of the materials as … Continue reading The Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Parkwood Landfill Limited: ChD 29 Jan 2002

Commune de Braine-le-Chateau and Michel Tillieut and Others v Region Wallonee: ECJ 1 Apr 2004

ECJ Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC – Waste – Management plans – Suitable sites and installations for waste disposal – Permit granted in the absence of a management plan containing a map specifying planned locations for disposal sites. The Court referred to the Directive as ‘a policy framework’ . . which need not necessarily describe in … Continue reading Commune de Braine-le-Chateau and Michel Tillieut and Others v Region Wallonee: ECJ 1 Apr 2004

Derbyshire Waste Ltd v Blewett and Another: CA 11 Nov 2004

Glapswell Colliery had closed. The owners sought to use it for waste disposal by landfill. The objector had obtained judicial review of the permission granted. Held: The intention of the Landfill Directive was to discourage its use other than as a last resort. Though the Directive was part of English law, by affecting the weight … Continue reading Derbyshire Waste Ltd v Blewett and Another: CA 11 Nov 2004

Castle Cement v Environment Agency: Admn 22 Mar 2001

The court was asked ‘whether the burning of Cemfuel, as a fuel in the Ribblesdale and Ketton Cement Works operated by the Applicant (Castle), amounts to the burning of ‘hazardous waste’, as the Environment Agency has concluded, or to the burning of a non-waste fuel, as Castle contends.’ Held: Stanley Burnton J said: ‘Whether material … Continue reading Castle Cement v Environment Agency: Admn 22 Mar 2001

Ezeemo and Others v Regina: CACD 16 Oct 2012

The defendants had been charged with offences relating to their intended transporting of waste materials to Nigeria. They appealed, complaining that the judge had directed that the offence under regulation 23 was an offence of strict liability. Held: The appeals failed. Once a substance or object has been discarded (and has therefore become waste) the … Continue reading Ezeemo and Others v Regina: CACD 16 Oct 2012

Regina v Budimir and Another: CACD 29 Jun 2010

The defendants sought leave to appeal out of time saying that their convictions had been under the 1984 Act which was later found to have been unenforceable for failure to comply with notification requirements under European law. The 1984 Act had had to be repealed and re-enacted in the 2010 Act. Held: Leave was refused. … Continue reading Regina v Budimir and Another: CACD 29 Jun 2010