Category: Environment

Regina v Nature Conservancy Council ex parte London Brick Property Ltd: 1996

Citations:

[1996] Env LR 1

Statutes:

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 28(1)

Cited by:

Cited – Fisher and Another v English Nature Admn 4-Jul-2003
The claimants were trustees of land. The Respondent had notified the Secretary of State that they considered that part of the land satisfied the criteria to be certifed as being of special scientific interest. They now intended to confirm the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.186085

Leeds City Council v Spencer: CA 6 May 1999

The defendant appealed against an order refusing to set aside an enforcement notice served by the council for his failure to destroy rats and mice on his land.
Held: A local authority had a statutory duty to collect waste, and could not therefore serve a notice, requiring a landowner to clear his land of rubbish, and to remove rats and mice which had gathered. That duty was its own, and could not be moved onto others.

Citations:

Times 24-May-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1351

Statutes:

Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949, Environmental Protection Act 1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Animals, Environment

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.146266

Impress (Worcester) Ltd v Rees: QBD 1971

The appellants kept a fuel oil storage tank with an unlocked valve in their yard near the river. An unauthorised person entered during the night and opened the valve. The justices convicted.
Held: The appeal was allowed. ‘On general principles of causation, the question which the justices ought to have asked themselves was whether that intervening cause was of so powerful a nature that the conduct of the appellants was not a cause at all but was merely part of the surrounding circumstances.’ The answer was that ‘it was not the conduct of the appellants but the intervening act of the unauthorised person which caused the oil to enter the river.’

Judges:

Cooke J

Citations:

[1971] 2 All ER 357

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Wrongly decided – Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority HL 22-Jan-1998
A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. It was surrounded by a bund to contain spillage, but that protection was over ridden by an extension pipe from the tank to a drum outside the bund. Someone opened a tap on that pipe so that . .
Explained – Alphacell Ltd v Woodward HL 3-May-1972
The defendant operated a paper manufacturing plant which involved maintaining tanks of polluting liquid near the river, so that pollution would occur if they overflowed. There were pumps which ought normally to have drawn off the liquid and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.190106

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another, ex parte Marson: CA 18 May 1998

The Secretary of State need not give any reasons for his decision not to require an environmental impact assessment for a development.

Citations:

Times 18-May-1998

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 (1988 No 1199)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.87810

Regina v Durham County Council and Others Ex Parte Huddleston: CA 15 Mar 2000

A quarry owner had allowed his mineral extraction licence to lapse, and sought to renew the permission. The authority failed to issue a decision within the appropriate time period, and a deemed permission was granted. The UK system appeared not to require an environmental impact assessment to be made before such a grant, in breach of European law. It was held that under such circumstances, a private individual deprived of his rights under European law, should be allowed to challenge the deemed permission. The directive had direct effect.

Citations:

Times 15-Mar-2000, Gazette 30-Mar-2000, [2000] 1 WLR 1484

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Durham County Council Sherburn Stone Company Limited Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions ex parte Rodney Huddleston CA 15-Feb-1999
. .
See Also – Regina v Durham County Council Sherburn Stone Company Limited ex parte Huddlestone Admn 28-Jul-1999
. .
See Also – Regina v Durham County Council ex parte Rodney Huddleston Admn 17-Aug-1999
Variation of interim injunction to allow works preparatory to development pending appeal against refusal of planning permission. . .
Appeal from – Regina v Durham County Council Ex Parte Huddleston QBD 28-Jan-2000
A quarry owner had allowed his mineral extraction licence to lapse, and sought to renew the permission. The authority failed to issue a decision within the appropriate time period, and a deemed permission was granted. It was held however that where . .

Cited by:

Cited – Finn-Kelcey v Milton Keynes Council and MK Windfarm Ltd CA 10-Oct-2008
Judicial Review must be timely
The appellant challenged the grant of permission for a wind farm on neighbouring land. His application for judicial review had been rejected for delay and on the merits.
Held: The court repeated the requirement that an application must be both . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment, European

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.85241

Regina v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council Ex Parte Trustees of the Council for the Protection of Rural England: QBD 26 Oct 1999

The authority gave permission for a new shopping centre up to 600,000 sq ft as an urban project. The Trustees sought that the permission be set aside since the council had not undertaken an environmental impact assessment, and under the EC Treaty they had the right to make such a request. It was held that an individual could not seek to enforce a directive once it had been properly enshrined in a member state’s law. ‘ . . I accept that in exercising discretion with regard to costs . . I should seek to give effect to the overriding objective and should have particular regard to the need, so far as practicable, to ensure that the parties are on an equal footing and that the case is dealt with in a way which is proportionate to the financial position of each party. Those aspects of the overriding objective seem to me to be embedded in any event in the principles laid down in ex p CPAG.’

Judges:

Richards J

Citations:

Gazette 13-Jan-2000, CAT 26 October 1999

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 (1988 No 1199)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom,The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, The Secretary of State for Defence (2) Admn 5-Dec-2002
The claimants intended to seek a judicial review requesting an interpretation of a resolution of the United Nations Security Council. They sought first, an order pre-emptively to limit their liability for costs.
Held: To make such a protective . .
Cited – Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .
Cited – Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex Parte Milne (2) QBD 31-Jul-2000
Developers submitted applications for outline permission for the development of a business park. The applicant sought to quash the grant on the basis that the environmental assessment was insufficiently detailed, and contained reserved matters, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Planning, European

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.85293

Official Receiver v Environment Agency: CA 5 Aug 1999

A waste management licence could constitute both property and onerous property for the purposes of the Insolvency Act. It could also be an interest incidental to the land to which it related. Because of this the liquidator of a waste management company could disclaim the licence without committing an offence under the Act.

Citations:

Times 05-Aug-1999

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 33 34, Insolvency Act 1986 178(3), 436

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment, Insolvency

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.84428

Commission of the European Community v United Kingdom: ECJ 24 Aug 1993

The wording in the directive regarding the ‘traditional practice of bathing by large numbers’ is precise, and the UK must implement it.
Europa 1. Acts of the institutions – Directives – Implementation by the Member States – Information given to the Commission concerning planned measures – Obligation of the Commission to react within a specific period – None – Possibility of subsequently bringing proceedings against a Member State for failure to fulfil obligations (EEC Treaty, Arts 5, 169 and 189, third para.) 2. Approximation of laws – Quality of bathing water – Directive 76/160 – Bathing waters – Definition – Areas specially equipped for bathing and supervised by lifeguards – included irrespective of the actual number of bathers (Council Directive 76/160, Art. 1(2)(a), second indent) 3. Approximation of laws – Quality of bathing water – Directive 76/160 – Implementation by the Member States – Obligation as to the result to be achieved (Council Directive 76/160)
1. A Member State which is bound to implement a directive is not entitled to draw the inference from the Commission’s initial failure to react to a communication addressed to it regarding the manner in which the Member State intended to implement the directive that the Commission, which was obliged by neither Article 5 of the Treaty nor the provisions of the directive to express a view within a given period, had approved the criteria notified. It is for the Commission to decide when it intends to formulate objections and there is nothing to prevent it subsequently bringing proceedings against the Member State for failure to fulfil obligations. 2. The definition of ‘bathing water’ within the meaning of the second indent of Article 1(2)(a) of Directive 76/160 concerning the quality of bathing water must, in the light of the directive’ s underlying purpose as expressed in the recitals in the preamble thereto, be understood as encompassing at all events the waters of bathing resorts equipped with certain facilities, such as changing huts, toilets and markers indicating bathing areas, and supervised by lifeguards. 3. Directive 76/160 concerning the quality of bathing water, Article 4(1) of which imposes an obligation on Member States to take all the measures necessary to ensure that their bathing waters conform to the physical, chemical and microbiological values laid down by the directive within a period of ten years from its notification, requires Member States to take steps to ensure that the prescribed results are attained within the period laid down; apart from the derogations expressly provided for by the directive they may not rely on particular circumstances to justify a failure to fulfil that obligation.

Citations:

Independent 24-Aug-1993, C-56/90

Environment, European

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.79309

Commission of the European Communities v Ireland: ECJ 19 Oct 1999

The Directive gave member states some discretion as to setting criteria to be fulfilled before a project could be said to have a substantial effect and so require an environmental assessment before being allowed to proceed. Nevertheless, it was not open to members to use a simple size measurement as such a criteria, since this made no allowance for the possible substantial effects of even small projects.

Citations:

Times 19-Oct-1999, C-392/96

Statutes:

Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment., EC Treaty Art 226

Environment, European

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.79304

Aitken v South Hams District Council: HL 8 Jul 1994

A notice was served in 1983 under section 58 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 requiring the abatement of a noise nuisance. That section was repealed by the Environmental Protection Act 1990, with effect from 1st January 1991, and a new procedure for statutory nuisance was substituted. On 25th January 1992, an information was preferred alleging recurrence of a noise nuisance between August and October 1991, contrary to section 58 of the 1974 Act.
Held: A Noise abatement Notice remained valid as a basis for a prosecution even after the repeal of the section in Act under which it had been issued. The ability to enforce the obligation was preserved by section 16(1) of the Interpretation Act 1978.
The words ‘obligation’ and ‘liability’ embraced both civil and criminal obligation or liability: ‘ . . although the application of section 16(1)(d) is confined to the criminal field, I do not consider that this means that the words ‘obligation or liability’ referred to in section 16(1)(c) have to be regarded as being restricted to a civil obligation or liability. The words remain appropriate to cover an obligation or liability enforceable under the criminal law. While a ‘right’ and ‘privilege,’ which are also referred to in section 16(1)(c), have a distinctly civil flavour, this is not equally true of ‘obligation’ and ‘liability.’ It is perfectly possible for the same enactment to create an obligation or a liability which is both enforceable in a civil action, by a claim for damages, and by a criminal sanction. It would be strange if, in that situation, section 16(1) could preserve the obligation or liability so far as it was enforceable in a civil action, but not so far as it was enforceable in criminal proceedings. To my mind the important question is whether there is an obligation or liability rather than how that obligation or liability is enforced. The question of enforcement is dealt with in section 16(1)(e) and that provision clearly applies equally to civil and criminal enforcement.’

Citations:

Gazette 07-Oct-1994, Times 08-Jul-1994, Independent 13-Jul-1994, [1995] 1 AC 262

Statutes:

Control of Pollution Act 1974 58(1), Environmental Protection Act 1990

Cited by:

Cited – Tael One Partners Ltd v Morgan Stanley and Co International Plc SC 11-Mar-2015
This appeal raises a question of contractual interpretation. Its significance lies in the fact that the contractual condition in question forms part of the Loan Market Association standard terms and conditions for par trade transactions which are a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.77697

Edwards, Pallikaropoulos v The Environment Agency, The First Secretary of State, Secretary of State for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs, Cemex UK Cement Limited: CA 31 Jul 2006

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld The Hon Mrs Justice Maurice Kay Lord Justice Rix

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 877

Statutes:

Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000 (SI 2000/1973) 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Edwards, Regina (on the application of) v Environment Agency HL 16-Apr-2008
The applicants sought to challenge the grant of a permit by the defendant to a company to operate a cement works, saying that the environmental impact assessment was inadequate.
Held: The Agency had been justified in allowing the application . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.244245

A Lambert Flat Management Ltd v Lomas: 1981

The court considered the relationship between the appeals procedure provided for by the regulations and the ‘reasonable excuse for non-compliance’ provisions in s.58(1)(4) of the statute.
Held: Skinner J said: ‘I prefer to look at the scheme laid down in this Act and its associated Regulations. A comprehensive right of appeal is given by s.58(3) which was not available under the Noise Abatement Act, 1960. Regulation 4(2) . . permits an appeal on the ground that the notice is not justified by the terms of the statute. In my judgment an excuse cannot be ‘reasonable’ under s.58(3) if it involves matters which could have been raised on appeal under s.58(3) unless such matters arose after the appeal was heard, or if there was no appeal after the time for appealing had expired.’
Lord Justice Ackner said: ‘. . can the defendant urge as a reasonable excuse for failing to comply with the notice, that the same was invalid for one or more of the reasons provided by the regulations as permissible grounds of appeal? . . The answer to my mind is clearly in the negative. Not only is the right of appeal given by the statute but very detailed provisions have been made by the Regulations for the prosecution of such appeals. S.58(4) was not designed to give the recipient of the notice a choice of forum in which to mount his attack on the notice. It was designed to provide a defence to a criminal charge where he had some reasonable excuse, such as special difficulty in compliance with the notice. It does not provide an opportunity, when prosecuted, to challenge the correctness and justificiation of the notice where the defendant has not availed himself of this statutory opportunity to do so by way of appeal.’

Judges:

Justice Skinner and Lord Justice Ackner

Citations:

[1981] 1 WLR 898

Statutes:

Control of Pollution Act 1974 58

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – AMEC Building Limited and Squibb and Davies Limited v London Borough of Camden Admn 19-Jul-1996
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.227907

Djurgarden-Lilla Vartans Miljoskyddsforening v Stockholms kommun genom dess marknamnd: ECJ 15 Oct 2009

ECJ Directive 85/337/EEC – Public participation in environmental decision-making procedures – Right of access to a review procedure to challenge decisions authorising projects likely to have significant effects on the environment

Judges:

Bonichot P

Citations:

[2009] EUECJ C-263/08

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 85/337/EEC, Directive 2003/35/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Djurgarden-Lilla Vartans Miljoskyddsforening v Stockholms kommun genom dess marknamnd ECJ 2-Jul-2009
ECJ Directive 85/337/EEC – Environmental impact assessment Aarhus Convention – Directive 2003/35/EC – Access to justice – Whether non-governmental organisations for the protection of the environment have standing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.514938

Wright, Regina (on The Application of Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Another: SC 20 Nov 2019

W challenged the grant of planning permission for the change of use of agricultural land to allow erection of a wind turbine, saying that the authority had taken into account a promise by the land owner to run the scheme as a community development contributing funds locally, and that such was not capable of being a relevant matter.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The community benefits promised by Resilient Severndale did not satisfy the Newbury criteria and hence did not qualify as a material consideration within the meaning of that term in section 70(2) of the 1990 Act and section 38(6) of the 2004 Act.

Judges:

Lady Hale, President, Lord Reed, Deputy President, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Sales, Lord Thomas

Citations:

[2019] UKSC 53, [2020] JPL 646, [2019] WLR(D) 649, [2019] 1 WLR 6562, [2020] 2 All ER 1, [2020] 1 P and CR 14, UKSC 2018/0007

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2019 Jul 22 am Video, SC 2019 Jul 22 pm Video, SC 2019 Jul 23 pm video

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 70(2), Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 38(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Admn – Wright, Regina (on The Application of) v Forest of Dean District Council and Another Admn 9-Jun-2016
The court was asked whether or not an element of the package of socio-economic benefits associated with a wind turbine development, in the form of a local community donation based on turnover generated by the wind turbine, amounts to a material . .
Appeal from – Wright, Regina (on The Application of) v Forest of Dean District Council Resilient Energy Serverndale Ltd CA 14-Dec-2017
Permission for the change of use of land to allow erection of a wind turbine had been quashed on the basis that the LA had taken account of an irrelevant matter, namely the proposed financial contributions from the development to the local . .
Cited – Newbury District Council v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 1981
The grant of a temporary planning permission did not operate to cancel an existing established use. A planning condition requiring removal of hangars was invalid because it did not fairly or reasonably relate to the permitted development. The grant . .
Cited – Westminster City Council v Great Portland Estates plc HL 31-Oct-1984
The House was asked whether the 1971 Act permitted the relevant authorities, by resort to their development plans, to support the retention of traditional industries or was the ambit of the Act such as to permit only ‘land use’ aims to be pursued? . .
Cited – Regina v Plymouth City Council, ex parte Plymouth and South Devon Co-operative Society CA 1993
A supermarket operator was seeking to overturn planning consents granted to two rivals, and argued that the section 106 agreements were not material considerations unless they passed the necessity test.
Held: It was sufficient, on the basis of . .
Cited – Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Another SC 12-May-2010
The appellant’s land was to be taken under compulsory purchase by the Council who wished to use it to assist Tesco in the construction of a new supermarket. Tesco promised to help fund restoration of a local listed building. Sainsbury objected an . .
Cited – Tesco Stores Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Others HL 11-May-1995
Three companies had applied for permission to build retail food superstores in Witney. The Inspector had recommended Tesco’s proposal, but the respondent rejected it. Tesco’s had offered to provide by way of a section 106 agreement full funding for . .
Cited – Pyx Granite Co Ltd v Minister of Housing and Local Government CA 1958
Pyx Granite had the right to quarry in two areas of the Malvern Hills. The company required permission to break fresh surface on one of the sites.
Held: Conditions attached to the planning permission relating to such matters as the times when . .
Cited – Fawcett Properties Ltd v Buckingham County Council HL 1960
A grant of planning permission was subject to an agricultural occupancy condition: ‘The occupation of the houses shall be limited to persons whose employment or latest employment is or was employment in agriculture as defined by section 119(1) of . .
Cited – East Barnet Urban District Council v British Transport Commission CA 1962
Lord Parker CJ said that when considering whether there has been a change of use of land ‘what is really to be considered is the character of the use of the land, not the particular purpose of a particular occupier.’ . .
Cited – Aberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Planning Authority v Elsick Development Company Limited SC 25-Oct-2017
The court was asked whether, anticipating substantial growth, a local authority had power to attach to permissions for development conditions intended to recover sums for pooled fund for infrastructure development.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Cited – Mixnams Properties Ltd v Chertsey Urban District Council HL 1965
The local authority was not entitled under the 1960 Act to lay down conditions relating to the licensee’s powers of letting or licensing caravan spaces to its customers. The freedom to contract is a fundamental right, and that if Parliament intends . .
Cited – Copeland, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets Admn 11-Jun-2010
The authority had to consider whether to grant planning permission for a fast-food outlet near a school, which was said to conflict with government policy on healthy eating for children. The authority proceeded on the footing that this was not . .
Cited – Tesco Stores Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Others CA 25-May-1994
Three companies competed for permission to build a retail food superstore in Witney. The inspector recommended Tesco’s proposal, but the SSE set aside the inspector’s decision in favour of the local authority’s preference. Tesco sought a declaration . .
Cited – City of Bradford Metropolitan Councils v Secretary of State for the Environment CA 1986
Lloyd LJ said that it was axiomatic that planning permission cannot be bought or sold . .
Cited – Regina v Hillingdon London Borough Council, Ex parte Royco Homes Ltd 1974
A planning condition imposed solely for some other purpose or purposes, such as furtherance of the housing policy of the local authority, will not be valid as a planning condition.
As to the availability of judicial review or certiorari, Lord . .
Cited – Mitchell v Secretary of State for the Environment CA 1995
The developer applied for planning permission to convert a building from use for multiple occupation by way of bedsitting rooms to a small number of self-contained flats. There was a draft development plan of the local planning authority which set . .
Cited – Verdin (T/A The Darnhall Estate) v The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others Admn 10-Aug-2017
The case concerned a challenge to a decision of the Secretary of State refusing planning permission for residential development. The claimant was successful on a number of grounds, including that the Secretary of State had wrongly rejected, without . .
Cited – Welcome Break Group Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Stroud District Council and Another Admn 3-Feb-2012
The case concerned the grant of planning permission to develop land as a motorway service area upon condition of the acceptance of obligations by the developer and site owner in an agreement made under section 106 of the 1990 Act which included that . .
Cited – Working Title Films Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council and Another Admn 22-Jul-2016
Challenge by a neighbouring occupier (WTF) to a grant of planning permission by the Defendant WCC to the Interested Party MSR for ‘the erection of a building including excavation works to provide three basement storeys and six above ground storeys . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.644386

Environment Agency v Armstrong Environmental Services Ltd: Admn 22 Mar 2005

Judges:

Rose LJ, Holland J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 633 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 33(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Skipaway Ltd v The Environment Agency Admn 5-May-2006
The defendant appealed convictions for breaches of its waste management licence, in that waste had been stored outside the edges of the storage bays. The defendant said that the material had not yet been stored, and that it had been deposited by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Crime

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.224526

Oldfield, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Communities and Local Government and Others: CA 7 Nov 2014

Whether the proposed redevelopment of a site on the seafront at Margate ought to be subjected to an environmental impact assessment

Judges:

Lord Justice Maurice Kay

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 1446

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Planning, Environment

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.538319

Regina v Rothschild and RH Tomlinson Ltd: CACD 2004

It would be a contravention of a waste management licence requiring controlled waste not to be stored at a height greater that specified, to have a mound greater that that height containing an admixture of controlled and uncontrolled waste.

Citations:

[2004] EWCA 3320

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Skipaway Ltd v The Environment Agency Admn 5-May-2006
The defendant appealed convictions for breaches of its waste management licence, in that waste had been stored outside the edges of the storage bays. The defendant said that the material had not yet been stored, and that it had been deposited by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Environment

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.241510

Hart v Anglian Water Services Ltd: CACD 31 Jul 2003

In a private prosecution, Mr Hart complained that the defendant had allowed untreated sewage to be discharged into controlled waters. The defendant pleaded guilty, but now appealed the fine of andpound;200,000.
Held: The sentence was imposed on the basis that the discharge was substantial, and the effect on the environment disastrous. The defendant had many convictions for similar offences. Such discharges were properly characterised as criminal, and it was a question of what priority was given to prevention by the company. There was no standard tariff or scale of penalties, and the court declined to set one, referring only to a guideline booklet produced by the Magistrates association. Here the fine remained manifestly excessive, and was reduced to andpound;60,000.

Citations:

Times 18-Aug-2003

Statutes:

Water Resources Act 1991 85(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment, Criminal Sentencing, Utilities

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.185768

Regina (on the application of Lebus) v South Cambridgeshire District Council: QBD 27 Aug 2002

The applicant opposed permission for an egg-production unit, alleging that an environmental impact assessment was required. The regulations required a screening review to assess whether an assessment was required. There was no formal record of a screening review having been taken into account by the planning committee.
Held: The failure to record the screening was a defect in the way the decision had been reached, and nor was the council able to allow the application to proceed on the basis that fuller details would be supplied later. In deciding whether an EIA is required, the focus should be on likely significant environmental effects rather than on remediation or mitigation measures; and if a decision runs two issues together and rests on the view that remediation measures will be effective to prevent otherwise significant effects, it deprives the public of the opportunity to make informed representations in accordance with the EIA procedures about the adequacy of such measures. The claim was allowed.

Judges:

Mr Justice Sullivan, Richards J

Citations:

Gazette 19-Sep-2002, [2002] EWHC Admin 2009, [2003] JPL 466

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)(England and Wales) Regulations 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Bellway Urban Renewal Southern v Gillespie CA 27-Mar-2003
The applicant appealed against a decision for development granted in the absence of its own decision. The judge had quashed the decision because of the absence of an environmental impact statement.
Held: When making the screening decision, it . .
Cited – Younger Homes (Northern) Ltd v First Secretary of State and Another Admn 26-Nov-2003
The claimant sought to quash a planning decision on the basis that a screening decision had not been made.
Held: Though the procedures within the authority could have been bettered, there was no formal requirement for a screening option to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.177319

Regina v Liverpool Crown Court, Ex Parte Cooke: QBD 3 Apr 1996

Complaint was made against the council for creating a statutory nuisance under the 1990 Act. The tenant sought compensation under the 1973 Act. The council appealed an award of andpound;3,000 compensation.
Held: Compensation should be awarded for the period from the date of the notice until the date of the hearing. Where however the proceedings were delayed for more than six months from the date of the notice, the period was limited to the last six months before issue. Leggatt LJ ‘The power to make a compensation order under section 35 of the 1973 Act is of course not peculiar to statutory nuisance. So the power, and the monetary limit to which it is subject, were not themselves tailored to the requirements of statutory nuisance. It also seems unlikely that the Legislature paid regard specifically to the period in respect of which compensation would be payable. By section 35 the court may make a compensation order ‘for any personal injury, loss or damage resulting from’ the offence. The offence is of allowing a statutory nuisance to exist at the complainants’ premises at the date of the hearing. . . . I see no warrant for construing section 82 (or section 35) so as to entitle the court to take account of the whole period for which the nuisance is alleged to have existed. That is not the subject of the complaint, which therefore gives no notice to the person responsible of the length of the period for which the nuisance is alleged to have existed.’

Judges:

Leggatt LJ, Sir Iain Glidewell

Citations:

Times 22-Apr-1996, [1996] 4 All ER 589

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 82(6), Powers of Criminal Courts Act 1973 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Botross v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council QBD 7-Nov-1994
Statutory nuisance proceedings are in their nature criminal proceedings, and compensation may be awarded by the court. . .
Cited – Regina v Inner London Crown Court ex parte Bentham QBD 1989
The defendant sought legal aid to defend an action to abate a statutory nuisance under the 1936 Act.
Held: Such an action was criminal in nature. The action had been brought under section 99, but the imposition of a penalty under s94 was a . .
Cited – Herbert v Lambeth London Borough Council QBD 27-Nov-1991
An abatement order had been made against the council under the 1936 Act. The tenant appealed a finding that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to award compensation under the 1973 Act.
Held: An order under the 1973 Act required a criminal . .
Cited – Davenport v Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council CA 17-Mar-1995
The court was concerned with the refusal of the magistrates to make a compensation order after a plea of guilty to a statutory nuisance. The magistrates had also refused to award costs of the adjourned hearing at which compensation had been sought. . .
Cited – Northern Ireland Trailers Ltd v Preston County Borough 1972
It was argued that proceedings brought under s94 by information not complaint were a nullity.
Held: The argument failed. A failure to comply with an abatement notice was a criminal offence, but proceedings could also be brought by complaint . .
Cited – Regina v Newham Justices, ex parte Hunt etc CA 1976
The court asked whether proceedings under s99 were civil or criminal.
Held: ‘the proper interpretation of this section [section 99] leads to the conclusion that the individual can by information invoke section 94’ The offence was under s94 . .

Cited by:

Cited – Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) and Issa (Suing By her Next Friend and Father Issa) v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Hackney CA 19-Nov-1996
A Local Authority found guilty of a statutory nuisance is not thereby liable for a civil damages suit. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Nuisance

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.87199

Regina v O’Brien; Regina v Enkel: CACD 19 Apr 2000

A sentence of imprisonment was unnecessarily severe for a first offence of dumping tyres. The case did not involve any hazardous substances, and the offences were at the lower end of the scale, despite the results being unsightly, the risk (at worst) of rats and fire, the absence of any long term effect, the absence of danger, the expectation of being able to redistribute the tyres properly, no previous similar convictions, their (late) guilty pleas, and the fact that they were only part of the operation.

Citations:

Times 19-Apr-2000

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 33(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Environment

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.85436

Blue Circle Industries Plc v Ministry of Defence: ChD 11 Dec 1996

Damages for escape of nuclear waste to include diminution of land value. Radioactive pollution of land following such an overflow is physical damage.

Citations:

Gazette 15-Jan-1997, Times 11-Dec-1996

Statutes:

Nuclear Installations Act 1965

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Blue Circle Industries Plc v Ministry of Defence CA 16-Jun-1998
Contamination of land by the overflow of radioactive materials from a pond, led to damages for the cost of repair, and also the permanent diminution of the value in the land from physical damage.
Held: The Court dismissed the appeal of the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Blue Circle Industries Plc v Ministry of Defence CA 16-Jun-1998
Contamination of land by the overflow of radioactive materials from a pond, led to damages for the cost of repair, and also the permanent diminution of the value in the land from physical damage.
Held: The Court dismissed the appeal of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Land

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.78451

Regina v Swale Borough Council, ex parte Royal Society for the Protection of Birds: 1991

A party seeking a judicial review has a duty to go ahead very quickly. The court considered the need for an environmental assessment in respect of the proposed development.

Citations:

[1991] 1 PLR 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Finn-Kelcey v Milton Keynes Council and MK Windfarm Ltd CA 10-Oct-2008
Judicial Review must be timely
The appellant challenged the grant of permission for a wind farm on neighbouring land. His application for judicial review had been rejected for delay and on the merits.
Held: The court repeated the requirement that an application must be both . .
Cited – Friends of Basildon Golf Course v Basildon District Council and Another Admn 23-Jan-2009
The council owned land on which it ran a golf course. It set out to privatise it and sought interest. An application was made for planning permission. The applicants objected to the planning permission, saying that the Environmental Impact . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Planning, Environment

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.277139

Baxendale v McMurray: 1867

The plaintiff’s land was next to the river Chess. The defendant had for more than twenty years discharged refuse from his paper factory into the Chess upstream of the plaintiff. Latterly a change in the manufacture had led to a different and greater discharge of refuse. The plaintiff sought an order restraining the discharge.
Held: The defendant had acquired an easement. That right was to discharge such refuse as was generally produced by the reasonable and proper course of paper manufacturing using whatever materials were proper for the purpose. The claim was dismissed.
Lord Cairns LJ indicated though a change of materials had been involved in the business of the dominant owner, the servient owner had cause for complaint if he could show ‘a greater amount of pollution and injury arising from the use of this new material’ in order to establish a breach of his rights .

Judges:

Lord Cairns LJ

Citations:

[1867] 2 Ch App 790, [1867] 31 JP 821

Land, Environment

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.223974

Regina v Cornwall County Council ex p Hardy: Admn 2001

The council granted planning permission although its planning committee had decided that further surveys should be carried out to ensure that bats would not be adversely affected by the proposed development. The question was the adequacy of information provided pursuant to Schedule 3 (where an EIA had been required), rather than the initial decision whether an EIA was required at all. The planning committee had decided that further surveys should be carried out to ensure that bats would not be adversely affected by the development.
Held: Since those surveys might reveal significant adverse effects on bats, it was not open to the committee to conclude that there were no significant nature conservation issues until they had the results of the surveys. The surveys might have revealed significant adverse effects on the bats or their resting places. Without the results of the surveys, they were not in a position to know whether they had the full environmental information required by Regulation 3 before granting planning permission. It was not permissible to defer to the reserved matters stage consideration of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures.

Judges:

Harrison J

Citations:

[2001] 2001 Env LR 473

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Jones, Regina (on the Application of) v Mansfield District Council and Another CA 16-Oct-2003
Plannning permission was sought. Objectors said that it would have such an impact that an environmental impact assessment was required. They now sought judicial review of the decision to proceed without one.
Held: The judge had explained the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187370

Environment Agency v M E Foley Contractors ltd and Another: QBD 18 Jan 2002

The defendant company did not accept that it had accepted special waste at its disposal plant. Instead they claimed to have the appropriate licence or exemption.
Held: The burden of establishing acceptance of special waste was not on the defendant ,on a balance of probabilities, but lay on the prosecution. In effect he was claiming the licence, and so the provisions of the 1980 Act did not transfer the burden of proof.

Judges:

Auld, Gage, LLJ

Citations:

Times 04-Mar-2002

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 33(1)(a), Magistrates Courts Act 1980 101

Cited by:

Cited – Skipaway Ltd v The Environment Agency Admn 5-May-2006
The defendant appealed convictions for breaches of its waste management licence, in that waste had been stored outside the edges of the storage bays. The defendant said that the material had not yet been stored, and that it had been deposited by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Evidence

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.167719

European Parliament v Council of the European Union 162111: ECJ 25 Feb 1999

ECJ Regulations on the protection of forests against atmospheric pollution and fire – Legal basis – Article 43 of the EC Treaty – Article 130s of the EC Treaty – Parliament’s prerogatives.
Europa ‘It is clear from the provisions of the amended regulations that the aims of the Community schemes for the protection of forests are partly agricultural since they are intended in particular to contribute to safeguarding the productive potential of agriculture, and partly of a specifically environmental nature, since their primary objective is to maintain and monitor forest ecosystems.
In such circumstances it is necessary, in order to determine the appropriate legal basis, to consider whether the measures in question relate principally to a particular field of action, having only incidental effects on other policies, or whether both aspects are equally essential. If the first hypothesis is correct, recourse to a single legal basis is sufficient . . ; if the second is correct, it is insufficient . . and the institution is required to adopt the measure on the basis of both the provisions from which its competence derives . . . However, no such dual basis is possible where the procedures laid down for each legal basis are incompatible with each other . . .
With more particular reference to the common agricultural policy and the Community environmental policy, there is nothing in the case-law to indicate that, in principle, one should take preference over the other. It makes clear that a Community measure cannot be part of Community action on environmental matters merely because it takes account of requirements of protection referred to in Article 130r(2) of the EC Treaty . . . Articles 130r and 130s leave intact the powers held by the Community under other provisions of the Treaty and provide a legal basis only for specific action on environmental matters . . . In contrast, Article 130s of the Treaty must be the basis for provisions which fall specifically within the environmental policy . . , even if they have an impact on the functioning of the internal market . . or if their objective is the improvement of agricultural production . .

Citations:

C-164/97

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Horvath, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 21-Jul-2006
The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2004 Regulations whereby the payment under the Single Payment Scheme was reduced because of the existence of a public right of way across the land.
Held: ‘there are cogent arguments for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Environment

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.162111

Commission v France (Judgment): ECJ 18 Mar 1999

ECJ A Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order to justify a failure to comply with the obligations and time-limits laid down in a directive. In an action under Article 169 of the Treaty, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation prevailing at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion. Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds requires the Member States to provide the special protection areas referred to therein with a legal protection regime that is capable, in particular, of ensuring both the survival and reproduction of the bird species listed in Annex I to the directive and the breeding, moulting and wintering of migratory species which are regular visitors, albeit not listed in that annex. A protection regime under which – for want of any specific substantive measures, except in relation to hunting – the only status enjoyed by a special protection area is that of State-owned land and of a maritime game reserve is incapable of providing adequate protection for the purposes of those provisions. 4 Under Article 4(4) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds, Member States are required to take appropriate steps to avoid pollution and deterioration of the habitats of the species concerned, even in relation to an area which has not been classified as a special protection area provided that, under the directive, it should have been so classified. It follows that any infringement of that provision presupposes that the area in question is one of the most suitable territories in number and size for the conservation of protected species, within the meaning of the fourth subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the directive which lays down the criteria for such classification. In this connection, the mere fact that a site has been included by a Member State in an inventory of important areas for bird conservation does not prove that it ought to have been classified as a special protection area.

Citations:

C-166/97, [1999] ECR I-1719

Cited by:

Cited – Bown v Secretary of State for Transport CA 31-Jul-2003
The appeal concerned the environmental effect of the erection of a bridge being part of a bypass. It was claimed that the area should have been designated as a Special Protection Area for Birds (SPA), and that if so it should be treated as such for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Environment

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.162112

P and O Scottish Ferries Ltd v The Braer Corporation: OHCS 10 Mar 1999

The Act excluded wider claims than those prescribed within it. Economic losses arising for a ferry company losing out because of adverse publicity were not to be claimed. The Act is clear and there is no need to refer back to the Convention on which it was based.

Citations:

Times 10-Mar-1999

Statutes:

Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971 1, International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Environment

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.84516

Boyd and Another v Ineos Upstream Ltd and Others: CA 3 Apr 2019

Appeal from injunctions to Ineos Upstream Limited and various subsidiaries of the Ineos Gropu as well as certain individuals. The injunctions were granted against persons unknown who are thought to be likely to become protesters at sites selected by those companies for the purpose of exploration for shale gas by hydraulic fracturing of rock formations, a procedure more commonly known as ‘fracking’.

Judges:

Longmore, David Richards, Leggatt LJJ

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 515, [2019] 4 WLR 100, [2019] WLR(D) 201, [2019] HRLR 11, [2019] Env LR D1

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – London Borough of Enfield v Persons Unknown and Others QBD 2-Oct-2020
The council had obtained interim and final injunctions in 2017 against anticipated trespassers on its land and the order was due to expire. It now ought its extension and to amend the terms of the order.
Held: The court noted that no person . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Environment

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.635244

Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions and Another: QBD 15 Mar 2001

A larch tree overhung a garden, but was protected by a tree preservation order. The inspector declined authority to lop it on the basis of its value to the amenity. The Secretary overruled this but his decision was, in turn, set aside by the court on the basis that it was first too indistinct to allow the parties to know just what was allowed, and also that in denying the damage to the amenity value, he had failed to give sufficient reasons for going against the inspector.

Citations:

Gazette 15-Mar-2001, Gazette 29-Mar-2001

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 288

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Planning, Environment

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.88780

Clientearth v Commission: ECJ 4 Sep 2018

Provisions Governing The Institutions – Access To Documents – Judgment – Appeal – Access to documents of the EU institutions – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 – Impact assessment report, draft impact assessment report and opinion of the Impact Assessment Board – Legislative initiatives in respect of environmental matters – Refusal to grant access – Disclosure of the documents requested in the course of the proceedings – Continuing interest in bringing proceedings – Exception relating to the protection of the ongoing decision-making process of an EU institution – General presumption

Citations:

C-57/16, [2018] EUECJ C-57/16P, ECLI:EU:C:2018:660

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment, Information

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.621626

Butterworth v West Riding of Yorkshire Rivers Board: HL 26 Nov 1908

The appellants were manufacturers who for fifty years had discharged liquids from their factory into a sewer. The sewer was vested in the local sanitary authority and conveyed the liquids into a stream. The respondents, acting under powers conferred by the West Riding of Yorkshire Rivers Act 1894 (57 and 58 Vict. cap. clxvi) raised an action against the appellants in the County Court in which it was held that the appellants had committed an offence in terms of the Rivers Pollution Act 1876. This was affirmed by the King’s Bench Division. The manufacturers appealed.
Held: A manufacturer who discharges polluting liquids into a public sewer which leads into a stream is a ‘person who causes to fall or flow or knowingly permits to fall or flow or to be carried into any stream any poisonous, noxious, or polluting liquid proceeding from any factory,’ and thereby commits an offence under the Rivers Pollution Prevention Act 1876, sec. 4. He is not exempted from the provision of the Act by proving a prescriptive right to use the public sewer in the manner complained of.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Lorehurn), Lords Macnaghten, Robertson, and Collins

Citations:

[1908] UKHL 1020, 46 SLR 1020

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Rivers Pollution Prevention Act 1876 4 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621524

Plan B Earth and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy: Admn 20 Jul 2018

Renewed application for permission to apply for judicial review, brought by Plan B Earth and eleven other claimants, of the refusal by the Defendant to revise the 2050 carbon target

Judges:

Supperstone J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1892 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620658

Rogesa v Commission: ECFI 11 Jul 2018

Judgment – Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme – Request for access to information on the determination of the 10% most efficient installations the steel industry – Refusal of access – Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party – Higher public interest – Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 – Concept of information relating to emissions in the environment – Respect of deadlines

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:423, T-643/13, [2018] EUECJ T-643/13

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment, Information

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620042

Commission v Slovakia C-626/16: ECJ 4 Jul 2018

Failure of A Member State To Fulfil Obligations – Environment – Landfill of Waste – Judgment – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Environment – Landfill of waste – Directive 1999/31/EC – Existing landfill sites – Article 14 – Definite decision on whether or not operations may continue – Article 13 – Closure procedures – Judgment of the Court declaring a failure to fulfil obligations – Non-compliance – Article 260(2) TFEU – Pecuniary penalties – Penalty payment and lump sum

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:525, [2018] EUECJ C-626/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620009

Steetley Dolomite Ltd v Environment Agency: FTTGRC 23 May 2018

The court was asked whether or not a company is entitled to 184,630 allowances issued to it under the EU Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme in respect of an industrial plant, Thrislington, for the calendar year 2016 during which the plant did not produce any emissions.

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT NV – 2018 – 0003

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment, European

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619935

Lanarkshire County Council v Coatbridge Magistrates: HL 8 Apr 1910

In a petition under the Rivers Pollution Prevention Acts to have the magistrates of certain burghs ordained to abstain from ‘causing to fall or flow, or knowingly permitting to fall or flow or to be carried, into certain streams any solid or liquid sewage matter, held that it was irrelevant to aver in defence that the streams were so polluted as to be merely sewers into which it could not possibly be an offence to put sewage.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Earl of Halsbury, Lord James, Lord Atkinson, Lord Collins, and Lord Shaw

Citations:

[1910] UKHL 508, 47 SLR 508

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Environment

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619790

Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority: HL 22 Jan 1998

A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. It was surrounded by a bund to contain spillage, but that protection was over ridden by an extension pipe from the tank to a drum outside the bund. Someone opened a tap on that pipe so that diesel flowed into the drum until it overflowed.
Held: Whether a defendant caused an escape into a river was not defeated by an additional intervening cause. The question was, had an act been done and did it contribute forseeably to the escape. Acts of third parties and natural events are not defences to the strict criminal liability imposed by section 85(1) of the Water Resources Act 1991 for polluting controlled waters unless they are really exceptional events. The court discouraged too mechanical an approach to causation: ‘The first point to emphasise is that common sense answers to questions of causation will differ according to the purpose for which the question is asked. Questions of causation often arise for the purpose of attributing responsibility to someone, for example, so as to blame him for something which has happened or to make him guilty of an offence or liable in damages. In such cases, the answer will depend upon the rule by which the responsibility is being attributed.’

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Nolan, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Clyde

Citations:

Gazette 26-Feb-1998, Times 09-Feb-1998, Gazette 25-Mar-1998, [1998] 2 WLR 350, [1998] UKHL 5, [1999] 2 AC 22, [1998] 1 All ER 481

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Water Resources Act 1991 85(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Limited v National Rivers Authority (Now, Environment Agency) Admn 11-Dec-1996
. .
Cited – Galoo Ltd and Others v Bright Grahame Murray CA 21-Dec-1993
It is for the Court to decide whether the breach of duty was the cause of a loss or simply the occasion for it by the application of common sense. A breach of contract, to found recovery, must be shown to have been ‘an ‘effective’ or ‘dominant’ . .
Cited – Alphacell Ltd v Woodward HL 3-May-1972
The defendant operated a paper manufacturing plant which involved maintaining tanks of polluting liquid near the river, so that pollution would occur if they overflowed. There were pumps which ought normally to have drawn off the liquid and . .
Disapproved – Price v Cromack 1975
The defendant maintained two lagoons on his land into which, pursuant to an agreement, the owners of adjoining land discharged effluent. The lagoons developed leaks which allowed the effluent to escape into the river.
Held: The escape had not . .
Disapproved – Wychavon District Council v National Rivers Authority QBD 16-Sep-1992
The council maintained the sewage system in its district as agent for the statutory authority, the Severn Trent Water Authority. It operated, maintained and repaired the sewers. As sewage authority, it received raw sewage into its sewers. On the . .
Cited – National Rivers Authority v Yorkshire Water Services Ltd HL 21-Nov-1994
The defendant sewerage undertaker received sewage, treated it in filter beds and discharged the treated liquid into the river. One night someone unlawfully discharged a solvent called iso-octanol into the sewer. It passed through the sewage works . .
Cited – Weld-Blundell v Stephens HL 1920
The plaintiff had been successfully sued for a libel contained in a document which he had supplied to his accountant.
Held: He could not recover the damages he had had to pay to the defamed party from his accountant, who had negligently left . .
Cited – Stansbiev Troman CA 1948
A decorator working alone in a house went out to buy wallpaper and left the front door unlocked. He was held liable for the loss caused by a thief who entered while he was away. For the purpose of attributing liability to the thief (e.g. in a . .
Wrongly decided – Impress (Worcester) Ltd v Rees QBD 1971
The appellants kept a fuel oil storage tank with an unlocked valve in their yard near the river. An unauthorised person entered during the night and opened the valve. The justices convicted.
Held: The appeal was allowed. ‘On general principles . .
Cited – Mediterranean Freight Services Ltd v BP Oil International Ltd (The Fiona) CA 27-Jul-1994
A ship owner is to have made his ship seaworthy in order to claim an indemnity for dangerous fuel set alight by a third party. He was not entitled to claim where the failure to keep the ship seaworthy was his own.
Hirst LJ said: ‘The inclusion . .
Cited – National Rivers Authority v Wright Engineering Co Ltd QBD 19-Nov-1993
Escape following vandalism was not ’caused’ by the company. It was not foreseeable. Although there had been past incidents of vandalism at the defendant’s premises, ‘the vandalism involved was not reasonably foreseeable because it was out of all . .
Cited – Welsh Water Authority v Williams Motors (Cwmdu) Ltd QBD 1-Dec-1988
Oil was supplied to Williams Motors by Autobrec Oils and there was spillage from an offset fuel pipe out of sight of the delivery driver. Some of the spilt oil got into the storm drainage, and thus into a canal. Williams Motors were charged under . .
Cited – Regina v CPC (UK) Ltd, CPC (UK) Ltd v National Rivers Authority CACD 4-Aug-1994
The defendant operated a factory, using cleaning liquid carried through PVC piping. The piping leaked because it had been badly installed by the reputable subcontractors employed by the previous owners of the factory.
Held: Although the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Transco plc v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council HL 19-Nov-2003
Rylands does not apply to Statutory Works
The claimant laid a large gas main through an embankment. A large water supply pipe nearby broke, and very substantial volumes of water escaped, causing the embankment to slip, and the gas main to fracture.
Held: The rule in Rylands v Fletcher . .
Cited – Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and Others HL 20-Jun-2002
The claimants suffered mesothelioma after contact with asbestos while at work. Their employers pointed to several employments which might have given rise to the condition, saying it could not be clear which particular employment gave rise to the . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another ex parte Shah HL 25-Mar-1999
Both applicants, Islam and Shah, citizens of Pakistan, but otherwise unconnected with each other, had suffered violence in Pakistan after being falsely accused them of adultery. Both applicants arrived in the UK and were granted leave to enter as . .
Cited – Express Ltd v The Environment Agency QBD 15-Jul-2004
The dairy appealed its conviction for allowing cream to enter a brook from the land of its customer.
Held: Polluting matter did not need to be itself noxious or poisonous, it was enough that it stained or tinted the water as did cream. Though . .
Cited – Chester v Afshar HL 14-Oct-2004
The claimant suffered back pain for which she required neurosurgery. The operation was associated with a 1-2% risk of the cauda equina syndrome, of which she was not warned. She went ahead with the surgery, and suffered that complication. The . .
Applied – Regina v Finlay CACD 8-Dec-2003
The defendant appealed from his conviction for manslaughter. He had been found to have prepared heroin by loading it into a syringe and passing it to a friend.
Held: Even if ‘the appellant had not himself wielded the syringe, he would have . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Reeves (Joint Administratix of The Estate of Martin Lynch, Deceased) HL 15-Jul-1999
The deceased was a prisoner known to be at risk of committing suicide. Whilst in police custody he hanged himself in his prison cell. The Commissioner accepted that he was in breach of his duty of care to the deceased, but not that that breach was . .
Cited – Regina v Kennedy HL 17-Oct-2007
The defendant had been convicted of manslaughter. He had supplied a class A drug to a friend who then died taking it. The House was asked ‘When is it appropriate to find someone guilty of manslaughter where that person has been involved in the . .
Cited – Hurst, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v London Northern District Coroner HL 28-Mar-2007
The claimant’s son had been stabbed to death. She challenged the refusal of the coroner to continue with the inquest with a view to examining the responsibility of any of the police in having failed to protect him.
Held: The question amounted . .
Cited – Regina v RL and JF CACD 28-Aug-2008
Club, not members, prosecutable for breach
The Environment Agency appealed against dismissal of charges against the defendants who were officers in an unincorporated members’ golf club on whose land there had been pollution. The judge had ruled that the unincorporated association could have . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Utilities

Leading Case

Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.135165

Klohn v An Bord Pleanala; Sligo County Council, Maloney and Matthews Animal Collections Ltd: ECJ 5 Jun 2018

Environmental Impact Assessment – Notion of ‘Not Prohibitively Expensive – Opinion – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Impact assessment – Access to a review procedure – Requirement that review procedure is not prohibitively expensive – Notion of ‘not prohibitively expensive’ – General principle of law – Temporal application – Direct effect – res judicata – Consequences for a decision awarding costs that has become definitive

Judges:

Bobek AG

Citations:

C-167/17, [2018] EUECJ C-167/17 – O, ECLI:EU:C:2018:387

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616997

Commission v Italy C-251/17: ECJ 31 May 2018

Environment – Judgment – Failure of a Member State to fulfill obligations – Urban waste water collection and treatment – Directive 91/271 / EEC – Articles 3, 4 and 10 – Judgment of the Court establishing a failure to fulfill obligations – Non-implementation – Article 260 (2) TFEU – Financial penalties – Time-limit and lump sum

Citations:

[2018] EUECJ C-251/17, ECLI:EU:C:2018:358

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616930

Commission v Netherlands: ECJ 2 Oct 2003

ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Directive 91/676/EEC – Protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources – Article 5(4) and (5), paragraphs A(1), (2), (4) and (6) of Annex II and paragraph 1(2) and (3) and paragraph 2 of Annex III – Capacity of storage vessels for livestock manure – Limitation of the land application of fertilisers based on a balance between the foreseeable nitrogen requirements of crops and the nitrogen supply to crops from the soil and from fertilisation – Ensuring that the amount of livestock manure applied to land each year does not exceed a specified amount per hectare – Provisions contained in a code of good agricultural practice and covering periods, conditions and procedures for the land application of fertilisers – Obligation to adopt any additional measures or reinforced actions necessary

Citations:

C-322/00, [2003] EUECJ C-322/00

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 91/676/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Animals, Environment

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.186872

Aannemersbedriijf P K Kraaijeveld v Gedeputeerde Staten Van Zuid-Holland ‘the Dutch-Dykes case): ECJ 24 Oct 1996

ECJ The fact that in this case the Member States have a discretion under Articles 2(1) and 4(2) of the directive does not preclude judicial review of the question whether the national authorities exceeded their discretion (see, in particular, VERBOND VAN NEDERLANDSE ONDERNEMINGEN). Consequently where, pursuant to national law, a court must or may raise of its own motion pleas in law based on a binding national rule which were not put forward by the parties, it must, for matters within its jurisdiction, examine of its own motion whether the legislative or administrative authorities of the Member State remained within the limits of their discretion under Article 2(1) and 4(2) of the directive.

Citations:

C-72/95, [1997] 3 CMLR 1, [1996] ECR I-0503, [1996] EUECJ C-72/95, [1996] ECR I-5403

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (85/337/EEC)

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Jones, Regina (on the Application of) v Mansfield District Council and Another CA 16-Oct-2003
Plannning permission was sought. Objectors said that it would have such an impact that an environmental impact assessment was required. They now sought judicial review of the decision to proceed without one.
Held: The judge had explained the . .
Cited – Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Alford Admn 5-May-2005
The land owner had restored derelict farm buildings to previous levels of agricultural production. She had applied manure and calcified seaweed to the land. She appealed conviction for having carried out projects on land without satiisfying the . .
Cited – Save Britain’s Heritage, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others Admn 14-May-2010
The claimant challenged the order allowing the demolition of a disused listed building saying that the Direction was contrary to European law in not requiring an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The Secretary of State said an EIA was not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment

Updated: 17 April 2022; Ref: scu.161538

Commission v Bulgaria C-97/17: ECJ 26 Apr 2018

Environment – Conservation of Wild Birds – Judgment – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Protection of nature – Directive 2009/147/EC – Conservation of wild birds – Special Protection Area (SPA) – Classification as SPAs of the most suitable territories in number and size for the conservation of the bird species listed in Annex I to Directive 2009/147 – Important Bird Area (IBA) – IBA Rila – Partial classification of IBA Rila as an SPA

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:285, [2018] EUECJ C-97/17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment, Animals

Updated: 14 April 2022; Ref: scu.609302

Grace and Sweetman v An Bord Pleanala: ECJ 19 Apr 2018

Environment – Assessment of The Implications of A Wind Farm Project – Opinion – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Directive 92/43/EEC – Article 6(3) – Directive 2009/147/EC – Assessment of the implications of a wind farm project for a special protection area – Hen harrier (Circus cyaneus) – Mitigation measures

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:274, [2018] EUECJ C-164/17 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.609058

Southern Water Authority v Nature Conservancy Council: HL 9 Sep 1992

That a Water Authority was digging a ditch was not a sufficient connection with the land to make them occupiers and capable of committing an offence as occupiers. The statutory provisions were toothless for ‘it needs only a moment to see that this regime is toothless, for it demands no more from the owner or occupier of an SSSI than a little patience.’

Judges:

Lord Mustill

Citations:

Gazette 09-Sep-1992, [1992] 1 WLR 775

Statutes:

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 28(5)(a)

Cited by:

Cited – Trailer and Marina (Leven) Ltd, Regina (ex parte) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another CA 15-Dec-2004
The claimant sought a declaration that the 1981 Act, as amended, interfered with the peaceful enjoyment of its possession, namely a stretch of canal which had been declared a Site of Special Scientific Interest, with the effect that it was unusable. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.89423

Regina v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council and Others: QBD 12 Oct 1993

Rules made to control the number of night flights were unlawful. The calculations used were not in the methods prescribed by Act. Suggest change to Order 53.

Citations:

Independent 15-Oct-1993, Times 12-Oct-1993, [1994] 1 WLR 74

Statutes:

Civil Aviation Act 1982 73(3b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.87971

Regina v Northumbrian Water Limited, Ex Parte Newcastle and North Tyneside Health Authority: QBD 3 Feb 1999

A water company’s duty as regards fluoridation of water supplies, is to have regard to the interests of its shareholders, not the general public good. Having considered this with the Health authority, it had the choice as a private company to choose.

Citations:

Gazette 03-Feb-1999, [1998] All ER (D) 733

Statutes:

Water Industry Act 1991 87

Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87475

Regina v North Yorkshire County Council Ex Parte Brown and Another: CA 9 Feb 1998

Local Authority must consider environmental assessments under new EU directives when reconsidering old mining planning permission.

Citations:

Times 09-Feb-1998

Statutes:

Planning and Compensation Act 1991

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal to – Regina v North Yorkshire County Council, ex parte Brown and Another HL 12-Feb-1999
When a mineral planning authority set conditions on the continued operation of a quarry which had been operating since pre-1947, that decision was a development consent, and it required to be supported by an environmental impact assessment, since it . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v North Yorkshire County Council, ex parte Brown and Another HL 12-Feb-1999
When a mineral planning authority set conditions on the continued operation of a quarry which had been operating since pre-1947, that decision was a development consent, and it required to be supported by an environmental impact assessment, since it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87455

Regina v Milford Haven Port Authority: Crwn 10 Mar 1999

A four million pound fine for a major pollution event was proper to reflect the genuine and justified public concern which had been caused. If damage flowed directly from the conduct of a business, the business was as liable as those directly responsible.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Mar-1999

Statutes:

Water Resources Act 1991 85(1)

Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87345

Regina (Fernback and Others) v Harrow London Borough Council: QBD 15 May 2001

The local planning authority adopted a screening opinion that proposed development was not development requiring an EIA under the 1999 Regulations. About a year later it granted planning permission for the proposed development. Local residents challenged the legality of the planning permission. It was open to a planning authority to reconsider the need for an environmental impact assessment and if necessary to change its mind, but it had no duty to reconsider that original opinion when it came to determine the planning application. A screening decision by the Secretary of State was determinative of the need for an assessment, but a positive view of the planning authority was so in the absence a decision otherwise by the Secretary. The authority therefore retained a discretion but no duty, to review the need for an assessment.

Judges:

Richards J

Citations:

Times 15-May-2001, Gazette 07-Jun-2001, [2002] Env LR 10

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 (1988 No 1199)

Citing:

See Also – Fernback; Berger; Jacobs; Strachan and Wong v London Borough of Harrow Admn 11-Apr-2000
. .

Cited by:

Confirmed – Friends of Basildon Golf Course v Basildon District Council and Another Admn 23-Jan-2009
The council owned land on which it ran a golf course. It set out to privatise it and sought interest. An application was made for planning permission. The applicants objected to the planning permission, saying that the Environmental Impact . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85964

Regina (Marchiori and Another) v Environmental Agency: QBD 1 May 2001

The Agency had granted licences for the disposal of nuclear waste from military sites by a private company. Such disposals were not governed by the Euratom Treaty, which dealt with civil wastes only. The matter was generated in the course of the Trident nuclear weapons programme, the legality of which under international law, which the Environment Agency had properly considered to be outwith its jurisdiction. The later confirmation by the Food Standards Agency of the licence remedied the defect as regards the need for its approval at the time.

Citations:

Times 01-May-2001

Statutes:

Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (Nov 1990), Environment Act 1995 16(4A)(b)

European, Environment, Administrative

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85985

Rae (Agnes) v Glasgow City Council and Another: OHCS 22 Apr 1997

An employer may be liable for damages for passive smoking if the claim is pleaded correctly.

Citations:

Times 22-Apr-1997

Statutes:

Offices Shops and Railway Premises Act 1963 7

Environment, Employment, Health and Safety, Negligence

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85639

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions, Ex Parte Premiere Environmental Ltd: QBD 15 Mar 2000

A waste disposal licence was suspended. The notice provided that the suspension would terminate when the Environment Agency notified the licence holder that it in its view the disposal could safely be continued. The company complained that this was not sufficiently an ‘event’ and that accordingly the notice was ineffective. It was held that the word ‘event’ should not be construed so restrictively. The event should be related to the suspension but not further limited in its nature. The condition was appropriate.

Citations:

Times 15-Mar-2000

Licensing, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85496

Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Others, Ex Parte Greenpeace Ltd: QBD 19 Jan 2000

The European Community Directive on Habitats applied to the United Kingdom continental shelf, and was not restricted in its effect to the territorial limit of 12 miles. The Secretary of State in granting licences for the exploration of such waters for oil without regard to the Directive was acting unlawfully. Such activities could only be undertaken after giving consideration to the protection of threatened marine species.

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-2000

Statutes:

Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna

European, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85542

Regina v Durham County Council Ex Parte Huddleston: QBD 28 Jan 2000

A quarry owner had allowed his mineral extraction licence to lapse, and sought to renew the permission. The authority failed to issue a decision within the appropriate time period, and a deemed permission was granted. It was held however that where an application would as in this case require an environmental impact assessment, a deemed consent would require such an assessment also.

Citations:

Times 28-Jan-2000

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Durham County Council Sherburn Stone Company Limited Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions ex parte Rodney Huddleston CA 15-Feb-1999
. .
See Also – Regina v Durham County Council Sherburn Stone Company Limited ex parte Huddlestone Admn 28-Jul-1999
. .
See Also – Regina v Durham County Council ex parte Rodney Huddleston Admn 17-Aug-1999
Variation of interim injunction to allow works preparatory to development pending appeal against refusal of planning permission. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Durham County Council and Others Ex Parte Huddleston CA 15-Mar-2000
A quarry owner had allowed his mineral extraction licence to lapse, and sought to renew the permission. The authority failed to issue a decision within the appropriate time period, and a deemed permission was granted. The UK system appeared not to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85243

Regina v Harris: CACD 2 May 2000

A farmer obtained a license for landfill. He continued to operate the landfill site, even though he was subject to a stop notice from the local planning department. He was accused of fraudulently evading payment of landfill tax. He claimed that, since the landfill operation was in breach of the stop notice, he was not operating under the licence, and no tax was payable, since the liability to tax only attached to licensed sites.
Held: The stop notice did not suspend the licence which was controlled by a different authority, and so the continued disposal was by virtue of the licence and was taxable.

Citations:

Times 02-May-2000

Statutes:

Control of Pollution Act 1974, Finance Act 1996

Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85297

Regina v Derbyshire County Council Ex Parte Murray: QBD 19 Oct 2000

The applicant sought to challenge the grant of licences for extraction of clay and other minerals. He claimed that the authority had failed to give proper consideration to the guidance from the department, that they had failed to give proper weight to the objectives required, and that the environmental report was inadequate. It was held that the authority had indeed properly allowed for the report, that the authority having considered the objectives, it was not open to the court to look at what importance had been assigned to the different elements, and that the environmental assessment had been challenged too late in the proceedings.

Citations:

Gazette 19-Oct-2000, Times 08-Nov-2000

Planning, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85221

Regina v Anglian Water Servies, ex Parte Three Valleys Water Plc: QBD 20 Jan 2000

The respondent was successor to the owners of a reservoir, and the applicants sought to increase the amount of water they could draw daily. It was agreed that the respondent was not a statutory water undertaker, and the extent of the applicants right of supply was governed by the Act establishing the right to draw water. Still, the applicants were not entitled to the full amount of water supply they sought.

Citations:

Gazette 20-Jan-2000

Land, Environment, Utilities

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85113

Network Housing Association Ltd v Westminster City Council: QBD 7 Nov 1994

An abatement notice was addressed by the respondent city council to freehold owners of tenanted premises, in respect of a noise source which it was out of their power to stop. This was noise from perfectly normal everyday living, which reached one flat from the flat above due to the absence (under ceiling, on floor or in the ceiling/underfloor void) of proper insulation. The only way in which the housing association could therefore abate the nuisance was by installing proper sound insulation. Nothing effective was said about how the noise could be abated, because the experts differed.
Held: A nuisance or noise abatement notice had to be specific enough to allow the person served to gain knowledge of what work was required of him to be carried out to secure compliance.

Citations:

Times 08-Nov-1994, Ind Summary 07-Nov-1994, [1995] Env LR 176, [1995] 27 HLR 189

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990

Cited by:

Cited – Surrey Free Inns Plc v Gosport Borough Council Admn 28-Jan-1998
The local authority issued a noise nuisance abatement notice. By the time the matter came to the court, the nuisance had been abated.
Held: The background situation justifying the issue of a nuisance abatement notice was to be assessed at the . .
Cited – Budd v Colchester Borough Council CA 30-Jan-1997
The applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision confirming a noise abatement notice under the Act. He kept dogs, and neighbours had complained of the noise. He complained that the notice neither specified the nuisance complained of, nor . .
Cited – Kirklees Metropolitan Council v Field; Thackray; Marsh and Wilson Admn 31-Oct-1997
An abatement notice requiring works to be carried out must state clearly what works are required or considered necessary. There was an imminent danger of the collapse onto some cottages of a rockface and wall where the notice was addressed to the . .
Cited – AMEC Building Limited and Squibb and Davies Limited v London Borough of Camden Admn 19-Jul-1996
. .
Cited – Vella v London Borough of Lambeth Admn 14-Nov-2005
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision to serve an abatement notice in respect of premises where the normal noise incidents of living were heard in neighbouring flats, which notices were to be abated by noise insulation.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Nuisance, Housing

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84259

National Rivers Authority v Wright Engineering Co Ltd: QBD 19 Nov 1993

Escape following vandalism was not ’caused’ by the company. It was not foreseeable. Although there had been past incidents of vandalism at the defendant’s premises, ‘the vandalism involved was not reasonably foreseeable because it was out of all proportion to the earlier and more minor incidents.’ Though Welsh Water Authority -v- Williams Motors (Cwmdu) Ltd was approved, ‘that does not mean that foreseeability is wholly irrelevant. It is one factor which a tribunal may properly consider in seeking to apply common sense to the question: who or what caused the result under consideration.’

Judges:

Buckley J

Citations:

Independent 19-Nov-1993, [1994] 4 All ER 281

Statutes:

Water Act 1989 107(1)(a)

Citing:

Approved – Welsh Water Authority v Williams Motors (Cwmdu) Ltd QBD 1-Dec-1988
Oil was supplied to Williams Motors by Autobrec Oils and there was spillage from an offset fuel pipe out of sight of the delivery driver. Some of the spilt oil got into the storm drainage, and thus into a canal. Williams Motors were charged under . .

Cited by:

Cited – Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority HL 22-Jan-1998
A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. It was surrounded by a bund to contain spillage, but that protection was over ridden by an extension pipe from the tank to a drum outside the bund. Someone opened a tap on that pipe so that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84191

Mott and Another v Environment Agency: CA 25 Jan 1999

A bylaw allowing the placing of fixed engines for the purposes of fishing for eels was not made in excess of the statutory power of the authority, and the Agency was liable in damages for having unlawfully seized the applicants’ eel fishing equipment.

Citations:

Times 25-Jan-1999

Statutes:

Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83880

Lambie and Another v Thanet District Council: QBD 17 Aug 2000

The local authority served notices for noise abatement, requiring the land owners to install sound limiting devices. The owners claimed that the terms of the notice were ultra vires in requiring them to allow entrance to the authority’s officers, and were uncertain in their requirements.
Held: The notices required a step to be taken within the Act, and were valid. The uncertainty in the remaining parts of the notice could be cured by substitution of a general reference to residential property.

Citations:

Gazette 17-Aug-2000

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 80

Nuisance, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82908

Landcatch Ltd v The Braer Corporation and Others: OHCS 6 Mar 1998

The pursuers reared salmon eggs to the age of two years (smolt), before then selling them on. The defenders caused an oil spill, and the area was designated as an exclusion zone preventing the pursuers continuing their trade and could not sell their smolt save at a much reduced price or not at all.
Held: The liability for damages flowing from an oil spill at sea were limited. These damages were only relational economic loss occurring in the area of the spill.

Judges:

Lord Gill

Citations:

Times 06-Mar-1998, [1998] 2 Lloyd’s LR 552

Statutes:

Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971

Cited by:

Appeal from – Landcatch Limited v The Braer Corporation and Williams and Jones and Hudner and Assurance Foreningen Skuld and the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund IHCS 19-May-1999
The pursuers raised freshwater salmon (smolt) to the age of two before selling them on. An oil spill prevented them trading. They appealed a refusal of damages on the baiss that this was pure relational economic loss.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Cited – D Pride and Partners (A Firm) and Others v Institute for Animal Health and Others QBD 31-Mar-2009
The claimants sought damages after the loss of business when the defendants’ premises were the source of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The organism had escaped from their premises via a broken drain.
Held: Much of the damage claimed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Scotland

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82941

Jordan v Norfolk County Council: ChD 25 May 1994

An order to replace trees ‘as reasonably practical’ was to include cost considerations, and it could be varied where the costs exceeded those expected. The mandatory order was varied. When considering what was meant by ‘reasonably practical’ ‘. . there is very little nowadays which is not physically feasible if enough money is spent. Hence in this context the phrase is apt to include financial considerations.’

Judges:

Sir Donald Nicholls VC

Citations:

Times 25-May-1994, Ind Summary 20-Jun-1994, Gazette 03-Aug-1994, [1994] 4 All E R 218, [1994] 1 WLR 1353

Cited by:

Cited – Midtown Ltd v City of London Real Property Company Ltd ChD 20-Jan-2005
Tenants occupied land next to land which was to be developed after compulsory acquisition. The tenants and the landlords asserted a right of light over the land, and sought an injunction to prevent the development. The developer denied that any . .
Cited – Calgin, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Enfield Admn 29-Jul-2005
The claimant complained that having applied for housing in the borough they had in fact housed him outside the borough.
Held: The authority had a duty to house the applicant so far it was reasonably practicable within its borders. The policy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Land, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82627

Gray and Another v Braer Corporation and Others: OHCS 10 Mar 1999

The Act limited claims generally to three years after any damage arose with a back-stop maximum of six years after which no claim at all could be begun. Section is a prescriptive provision not by way of a limitation period as such.

Citations:

Times 10-Mar-1999

Statutes:

Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971 9

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Environment

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.80982

Botross v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council: QBD 7 Nov 1994

Statutory nuisance proceedings are in their nature criminal proceedings, and compensation may be awarded by the court.

Citations:

Times 07-Nov-1994, (1994) 16 Cr App R (S) 622

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 82(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Adopted – Regina v Inner London Crown Court ex parte Bentham QBD 1989
The defendant sought legal aid to defend an action to abate a statutory nuisance under the 1936 Act.
Held: Such an action was criminal in nature. The action had been brought under section 99, but the imposition of a penalty under s94 was a . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Liverpool Crown Court, Ex Parte Cooke QBD 3-Apr-1996
Complaint was made against the council for creating a statutory nuisance under the 1990 Act. The tenant sought compensation under the 1973 Act. The council appealed an award of andpound;3,000 compensation.
Held: Compensation should be awarded . .
Followed – Davenport v Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council CA 17-Mar-1995
The court was concerned with the refusal of the magistrates to make a compensation order after a plea of guilty to a statutory nuisance. The magistrates had also refused to award costs of the adjourned hearing at which compensation had been sought. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Nuisance

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.78502

Assurenceforeningen Skuld v International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund and An: OHCS 14 Jun 1999

Where a compensation fund had been created with a last date for compensation claims to be made fixed, the Act was silent about how late claims were to be dealt with. There is no rule to say that applications for an extension of time must be made in advance, and the court felt it must be possible to apply.

Citations:

Times 14-Jun-1999

Statutes:

Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971 5(3)

Environment

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.77929

PPC Power v Financne riaditelstvo Slovenskej republiky: ECJ 12 Apr 2018

Environment – Scheme for Greenhouse Gas Emission Allowance Trading – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Directive 2003/87/EC – Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading – Objectives – Free allocation of allowances – National legislation making transferred and unused allowances subject to taxation)

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:245, [2018] EUECJ C-302/17

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2003/87/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608645

Saras Energia v State Administration: ECJ 12 Apr 2018

Energy – Opinion – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2012/27 / EU – Promotion of energy efficiency – Energy efficiency obligations mechanism – Other public policy measures – National Energy Efficiency Fund – Contribution obligation – Distributors of Energy and / or Retail Energy Sales Companies Required – Motivation

Citations:

C-561/16, [2018] EUECJ C-561/16 – O, [2018] EUECJ C-561/16

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment, Utilities

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608647

Commission v Germany -C-668/16: ECJ 11 Apr 2018

Approximation of Laws – Opinion – Failure of a Member State to fulfill obligations – Directive 2007/46 / EC – Liability of national authorities – Measures relating to the conformity of vehicles with technical requirements – Balancing the conformity gap and safety risks – Obligations of the manufacturer – Penalties – Directive 2006/40 / EC – Limit on emissions from air-conditioning systems of motor vehicles – Circumvention of the Directive

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:230, [2018] EUECJ C-668/16 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2007/46/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Road Traffic, Environment

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608633

People Over Wind and Sweetman v Teoranta: ECJ 12 Apr 2018

Environment – Conservation of Natural Habitats – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats – Special areas of conservation – Article 6(3) – Screening in order to determine whether or not it is necessary to carry out an assessment of the implications, for a special area of conservation, of a plan or project – Measures that may be taken into account for that purpose

Citations:

C-323/17, [2018] EUECJ C-323/17, [2018] WLR(D) 214

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608643