The claimants challenged the strategy published by the government for the development of the propose HS2 railway line, saying that it required first a strategic environmentalimpact assessment under European law.
Held: The claim failed. The strategy as published did not constrain in any way the decision making processes which might follow: ‘The very concept of a framework, rules, criteria or policy, which guided the outcome of an application for development consent, as a plan which required Strategic Impact Assessment even before development project Environmental Impact Assessment, presupposed that the plan will have an effect on the approach which has to be considered at the development consent stage, and that that effect will be more than merely persuasive by its quality and detail, but guiding and telling because of its stated role in the hierarchy of relevant considerations. That simply is not the case here.’
Judges:
Ouseley J
Citations:
[2013] EWHC 481 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 122, [2013] PTSR D25
Links:
Statutes:
Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (Parliament and Council Directive 2001/42/EC
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
At Admn – HS2 Action Alliance Ltd and Others v Secretary of State for Transport CA 24-Jul-2013
The claimants challenged the plan for a major railway development, saying that an environmental impact assessment should have been made first.
Held: (Sullivan LJ dissenting) The claimant’s appeal failed. The strategy as proposed was not such . .
At First Instance – HS2 Action Alliance Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Transport and Another SC 22-Jan-2014
The government planned to promote a large scale rail development (HS2), announcing this in a command paper. The main issues, in summary, were, first, whether it should have been preceded by strategic environmental assessment, under the relevant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Planning, Transport
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471933