Clientearth, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: CA 30 May 2012

The claimant appealed against refusal of its request for declaratory relief, the respondent having admitted failing to implement the Directive on the control of nitrogen dioxide.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge had been correct that the compliance by the respondent was not mandatory as to the time suggested. He was correct: ‘I cannot accept that the legislature intended by the terms of Article 22 to create a mandatory and absolute cut-off point for compliance with NO2 limit values as at 1 January 2015. ‘
and ‘it seems to me that he was, with respect, plainly right and the contrary is not contended. His judgment speaks as a declaration. No substantive issue of effective judicial protection arises from his refusal to grant a formal declaration.’

Judges:

Laws, Pitchford LJJ, Sir John Chadwick

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 897, [2013] Env LR 4

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2008/50/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromClientearth, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 13-Dec-2011
The claimant sought declaratory and mandatory orders in respect of the Government’s failure to comply with emission limits set by Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and Council of 21 May 2008. Article 13 of that Directive required . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromClientearth, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs SC 1-May-2013
The court gave its reasons for referring to the ECJ, the question asked of it, as to the failure of the respondent to ensure compliance with the EU Directive on Nitrogen dioxide control, and the consequential orders. However, a declaration was . .
Appeal fromClientearth, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs SC 29-Apr-2015
The applicant had challenged the failure by the governement to secure appropriate air quality standards. The question had earlier been referred to the ECJ, and the Court now considered the appropriate orders following the ECJ judgment.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, European

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.461947