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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Environment – Waste – Directives 75/442/EEC, 91/156/EEC, 91/689/EEC and 94/62/EC – Waste management plans: ‘ . . considering the objectives pursued by the obligation laid down in Article 7(1) of . .
