Champion, Regina (on The Application of) v North Norfolk District Council and Others: CA 18 Dec 2013

The claimant had succeeded in a challenge to the grant of planning permission for the building of two barley silos. He said that the development was near and might affect Site of Special Scientic interest. The Council had at the same time said that there was no requirement for an environmental impact assessment, and that it had to impose conditions which were only available if a threat existed requiring an assessment.
Held:

Richards, Lewison LJJ, Coleridge J
[2013] EWCA Civ 1657
Bailii
Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999, Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 61
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromChampion v North Norfolk District Council and Another Admn 7-May-2013
The claimant challenged the grant of planning permission for the erection of silos for the storage of barley. He said that the development might adversely impact on a nearby Site of Special Scientific Interest.
Held: The judicial review . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromChampion, Regina (on The Application of) v North Norfolk District Council and Another SC 22-Jul-2015
‘The appeal concerns a proposed development by Crisp Maltings Group Ltd (‘CMGL’) at their Great Ryburgh plant in Norfolk, in the area of the North Norfolk District Council (‘the council’). It was opposed by the appellant, Mr Matthew Champion, a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, European, Environment

Updated: 27 November 2021; Ref: scu.519217

Clientearth v The Secretary of State For The Environment, Food And Rural Affairs: ECJ 28 Nov 2013

Expedited procedure

C-404/13, [2013] EUECJ C-404/13
Bailii
Citing:
Reference 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 . .

Cited by:
See AlsoClientearth v The Secretary of State For The Environment, Food And Rural Affairs ECJ 19-Nov-2014
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Air quality – Directive 2008/50/EC – Limit values for nitrogen dioxide – Obligation to apply for postponement of the deadline by submitting an air quality . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Environment

Updated: 26 November 2021; Ref: scu.518883

Regina v Yorkshire Water Services Ltd: CACD 16 Nov 2001

The defendant company was sentenced for supplying water which was below standard. The fine imposed was calculated according to the number of consumers affected.
Held: When considering the level of fine, the court should look to, the degree of culpability; damage caused; the previous record; the need for balance between censure and any counter-productive effect, in the light of efforts to remedy the situation; and the acts of the water authority after the events in question. The number of complainants should not be used as a multiplier.

Lord Justice Mance and Mr Justice Rougier
Times 12-Dec-2001
Water Industry Act 1991 70(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v F Howe and Son (Engineers) Limited CACD 6-Nov-1998
The general run of fines imposed for Health and Safety breaches is too low. Penalties should be increased where the standards were compromised for cost cutting, for the degree of lapse, and where a fatality resulted. The same standards apply for . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.167015

Commission of The European Communities v United Kingdom (Third Chamber) C-390/07: ECJ 10 Dec 2009

ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Environment – Directive 91/271/EEC – Urban waste water treatment – Article 3(1) and (2), Article 5(1) to (3) and (5) and Annexes I and II – Initial failure to identify sensitive areas – Concept of ‘eutrophication’ – Criteria – Burden of proof – Relevant date when considering the evidence – Implementation of collection obligations – Implementation of more stringent treatment of discharges into sensitive areas

[2009] EUECJ C-390/07, [2010] Env LR D3, [2009] ECR I-214
Bailii
Directive 91/271/EEC
European

Environment

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.515365

Stichting Greenpeace Nederland, Pesticide Action Network Europe (Pan Europe) v European Commission: ECJ 8 Oct 2013

ECJ Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Documents relating to the first authorisation of the placing on the market of the active substance ‘glyphosate’ – Partial refusal of access – Risk of an adverse effect on the commercial interests of a natural or legal person – Article 4(5) of Regulation No 1049/2001 – Overriding public interest – Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 – Article 6(1) of Regulation No 1367/2006 – Directive 91/414/EEC

N J Forwood, P
T-545/11, [2013] EUECJ T-545/11
Bailii
European

Information, Environment

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.516354

Clientearth v European Commission: ECJ 13 Sep 2013

clientearth_ec092013

ECJ Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Studies received by the Commission concerning the transposition of directives on the environment – Partial refusal of access – Exception relating to protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits – Specific and individual assessment – Compatibility with the Aarhus Convention – Overriding public interest – Consequences of exceeding the period for the adoption of an express decision – Extent of the obligation actively to disseminate environmental information

H. Kanninen P
T-111/11, [2013] EUECJ T-111/11
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
Citing:
See AlsoClientEarth v European Commission ECFI 13-Nov-2012
ECFI Actions for annulment – Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Implied refusal of access – Period allowed for commencing proceedings – Delay – Manifest inadmissibility . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Information, Environment

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.515263

DK Recycling und Roheisen v Commission: ECJ 22 Jun 2016

(Judgment) Appeal – Environment – Directive 2003/87/EC – Article 10a – Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading – Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances from 2013 – Decision 2011/278/EU – National implementation measures submitted by the Federal Republic of Germany – Rejection of the inscription of certain installations on the lists of installations receiving free allocations of emission allowances – Provision relating to cases of ‘undue hardship’ – Implementing powers of the Commission

ECLI:EU:C:2016:469, [2016] EUECJ C-540/14
Bailii
Directive 2003/87/EC

European, Environment

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.565857

Commission v Greece C-584/14: ECJ 7 Sep 2016

Waste Management Compliance Failures

ECJ (Judgment) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Environment – Directive 2006/12/EC – Directive 91/689/EEC – Directive 1999/31/EC – Waste management – Judgment of the Court establishing a failure to fulfil obligations – Non-implementation – Article 260(2) TFEU – Pecuniary penalties – Periodic penalty payment – Lump sum

[2016] EUECJ C-584/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:636
Bailii
Directive 2006/12/EC, Directive 91/689/EEC, Directive 1999/31/EC, TFEU 260(2)
European

European, Environment

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.569042

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 required for a demolition.
Held: The challenge was rejected. Whether an EIA was required for a demolition was presently before the European Court of Justice. Planning permission is not required for demolition of any listed building; any building in a conservation area, any scheduled monument, or any building that is neither a dwelling nor adjoining a dwelling. This has no application to the partial demolition of any of those types of building and those types of building falling within (a) to (c) are subject to separate regulatory regimes.
Whilst planning permission is not required for demolition within the scope of the Demolition Direction, such demolition is subject to the regulatory regime set out in s.80-83 of the Building Act 1984. Demolition without reconstruction is not ‘development’ (because such is on its natural meaning the construction of a new building or new buildings or the alteration or refurbishment of an existing building or buildings)’
In any event the size of the proposed scheme also took it outside the EIA Regulations.

Pellings J QC
[2010] EWHC 979 (Admin), [2010] NPC 57, [2010] JPL 1429, [2011] Env LR 6
Bailii
Town and Country Planning (Demolition – Description of Buildings) Direction 1995, Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (85/337/EEC), Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999, Building Act 1988 80, Town and Country Planning Act 1990 55, General Permitted Development Order 1995
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedAannemersbedriijf 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 . .
CitedEcologistas En Accion-Coda v Ayuntamiento de Madrid ECJ 25-Jul-2008
EU Environment And Consumers – Directives 85/337/EEC and 97/11/EC – Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment – Refurbishment and improvement works on urban roads – Whether subject to assessment. . .
CitedCambridge City Council v Secretary of State for the Environment and Milton Park Investments Ltd 1992
D. wanting to develop an office block, bought neighbouring semi-detached houses hoping to provide additional car parking, enhancing the visual aspects and improving highway safety. When temporary planning consent for use of these properties as site . .
CitedShimizu (UK) Ltd v Westminster City Council HL 11-Feb-1997
The removal of a listed building’s chimney stacks was an alteration allowing a claim for compensation. The phrases ‘alteration’ and ‘demolition’ are mutually exclusive. Although part of a building may be a listed building, a part of a listed . .
CitedLandelijke Vereniging tot Behoud van de Waddenzee and Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Vogels v Staatssecretaris van Landbouw, etc ECJ 7-Sep-2004
ECJ Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna – Concept of ‘plan’ or ‘project’ – Assessment of the implications of certain plans or projects for the protected site.
CitedEdwards, 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 . .
CitedMortell, Regina (on the Application of) v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Admn 30-Mar-2007
The claimant sought orders quashing planning permissions granted for the re-development of land around Derker Station. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment, European

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.414966

Commission v United Kingdom C-304/15: ECJ 21 Sep 2016

Control of Polluting Power Station

ECJ (Judgment) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2001/80/EC – Article 4(3) – Annex VI, Part A – Limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants – Application – Aberthaw Power Station

C. Toader (Rapporteur), P
C-304/15, [2016] EUECJ C-304/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:706
Bailii
European

European, Environment

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.569501

Elektriciteits Produktiemaatschappij Zuid-Nederland: ECJ 9 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Atmospheric pollution – Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading – Directive 2003/87/EC – Concept of ‘installation’ – Inclusion of the fuel storage site – Regulation (EU) No 601/2012 – Concept of ‘fuel exported from the installation’

ECLI:EU:C:2016:422, [2016] EUECJ C-158/15
Bailii
Regulation (EU) No 601/2012, Directive 2003/87/EC

European, Environment

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.565604

EON Kraftwerke v Bundesrepublik Deutschland: ECJ 8 Sep 2016

Greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme within the European Union – Directive 2003/87/EC – Harmonised free allocation of emission allowances – Decision 2011/278/EU – Change to the allocation – Article 24(1) – Obligation of the operator of the installation to provide information – Scope

A Arabadjiev, P
C-461/15, [2016] EUECJ C-461/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:648
Bailii
Directive 2003/87/EC
European

European, Environment

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.569044

Commission v Poland: ECJ 20 Nov 2014

comm_polandECJ201411

ECJ Judgment – Failure to fulfill obligations – Directive 91/676/EEC – Protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources – Definition of inadequate or polluted waters may be – inadequate designation of vulnerable zones – Programmes of Action – incomplete measures

Mme K. Jurimae (Rapporteur), P
C-356/13, [2014] EUECJ C-356/13
Bailii
Directive 91/676/EEC

European, Environment

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.538953

Fishermen and Friends of The Sea v The Minister of Planning, Housing and The Environment: PC 27 Nov 2017

(Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago)
[2017] UKPC 37
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedMajera, Regina (on The Application of v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Oct-2021
The Court was asked whether the Government (or, indeed, anyone else) can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.599995

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 that the development conflicted with the applicable unitary development plan.
Held: The intent of the legislation had been satisfied, and as much information as was available had been provided. Some residual flexibility was inevitable: ‘a legalistic approach to the interpretation of development plan policies is to be avoided’. It was also common for such permissions to conflict in part with the UDP.
Where outline planning consent is being applied for, it is at the outline consent stage that the planning authority must have sufficient details of the proposed development, sufficient details of any impact on the environment, and sufficient details of any mitigation to enable it to comply with its article 4(2) obligation. An authority need not require further details of a matter where it is ‘satisfied that such details , provided they are sufficiently controlled by condition, are not likely to have significant effect.’ Mr Jones submits that such is the case here. There was a well established mitigating technique involving negative pressure which virtually eliminated any environmental problem. A planning authority is entitled to assume that the Environmental Agency will carry out its functions ‘with a reasonable degree of competence.’
‘the development which is described and assessed in the Environmental Statement must be the development which is proposed to be carried out and therefore the development which is a subject of the development consent and not some other development’ and the ‘ . . ..local planning authority will need to be satisfied that the description of the proposed development in the outline planning permission is adequate, given that it will be able to impose conditions in respect of reserved matters so that matters of detail can be dealt with at a later stage’.
and ‘Any major development project will be subject to a number of detailed controls, not all of them included within the planning permission. Emissions to air, discharges into water, disposal of the waste produced by the project, will all be subject to controls under legislation dealing with environmental protection. In assessing the likely significant environmental effects of a project the authors of the environmental statement and the local planning authority are entitled to rely on the operation of those controls with a reasonable degree of competence on the part of the responsible authority: see, for example, the assumptions made in respect of construction impacts, above. The same approach should be adopted to the local planning authority’s power to approve reserved matters. Mistakes may occur in any system of detailed controls, but one is identifying and mitigating the ‘likely significant effects’, not every conceivable effect, however minor or unlikely, of a major project.’
‘It is not at all unusual for development plan policies to pull in different directions. A proposed development may be in accord with development plan policies which, for example, encourage development for employment purposes, and yet be contrary to policies which seek to protect open countryside. In such cases there may be no clear cut answer to the question: ‘is this proposal in accordance with the plan?’ The local planning authority has to make a judgment bearing in mind such factors as the importance of the policies which are complied with or infringed, and the extent of compliance or breach.’
Sullivan J
Gazette 31-Aug-2000, [2001] JPL 470, [2001] Env LR 406, (2001) 81 PandCR 365
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 54A 70
Citing:
Se AlsoRegina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Andrew Tew; George Daniel Milne; and Steven Garner Admn 7-May-1999
An outline application for a shopping development, gave no details of the expected floor area, and nor was there an environmental assessment.
Held: The failure to give the floor area was not critical, but even at this stage the ommission of . .
CitedCity of Edinburgh Council v Secretary of State for Scotland and Another; Same v Same (Conjoined Appeals) HL 31-Oct-1997
The Listed buildings registers are to be read consistently; the trading level is a material consideration in listed buildings consent applications. The weight to be given to a material consideration once identified was a matter of judgment for the . .
CitedRegina 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 . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Environment ex parte Webster Admn 8-Mar-1999
A legalistic approach to the interpretation of policies in local and other plans is to be avoided. . .
CitedBerkeley v Secretary of State For The Environment and Others HL 11-May-2000
The claimant challenged the grant of planning permission for a new football ground for Fulham Football club, saying that an Environmental Impact Assessment had not been obtained, but was required.
Held: Where a planning application if . .
CitedWorld Wildlife Fund and Others v Autonome Provinz Bozen and Others ECJ 12-Oct-1999
The court considered a project for converting Bolzano airport in Italy from military to civilian use. The national law did not require the project to be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The court asked whether the national law . .
CitedRegina v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council Ex Parte Trustees of the Council for the Protection of Rural England CA 12-Jun-2000
. .
CitedRegina 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 . .

Cited by:
CitedHereford Waste Watchers Ltd v Hereford Council Admn 18-Feb-2005
. .
CitedJones, Regina (on the Application Of) v Mansfield District Council Admn 20-Jan-2003
. .
CitedRegina (Smith) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and others Admn 19-Dec-2001
. .
CitedBurkett, Regina (on the Application of) v Hammersmith and Fulham Admn 15-May-2003
Outline permission was granted for a large development, reserving certain matters. The applicant challenged the permission saying that the application had not included the information required under the Regulations, and the authority had failed to . .
CitedPPG11 Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Dorset County Council and Another Admn 6-Jun-2003
. .
CitedKent, Regina (on the Application Of) v First Secretary of State and others Admn 3-Dec-2004
. .
CitedJD Wetherspoon Plc, Regina (on the Application Of) v Guildford Borough Council Admn 11-Apr-2006
The company sought judicial review of the decision of the respondent to apply its cumulative impact policy to their application for extended licensing hours.
Held: The company’s application amounted to a material variation of the license, and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 October 2021; Ref: scu.87639

Commission v Italy – C-195/05: ECJ 18 Dec 2007

ECJ Environment and Consumers – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations Environment Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC – Concept of waste Food scraps from the agro’food industry intended for the production of animal feed Leftovers from the preparation of food in kitchens, intended for shelters for pet animals.
[2007] EUECJ C-195/05
Bailii
Directive 75/442/EEC, Directive 91/156/EEC
European

Updated: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.262911

Re Mineral Resources Limited; Environment Agency v Stout (Chd; Apr 1998): ChD 24 Jun 1998

A waste management licence was property, but public policy required that such licences should not be disclaimable by liquidators. There is a need to preserve responsibilities of those taking such licences.
Gazette 24-Jun-1998
Environmental Protection Act 1990, Insolvency Act 1986 178
England and Wales

Updated: 01 October 2021; Ref: scu.85837

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Ex Parte Friends of the Earth and Another: CA 7 Jun 1995

The Secretary of State can accept an undertaking from water companies instead of making an order to satisfy the obligations under the European directives.
Times 08-Jun-1995, Independent 07-Jun-1995
Water Industry Act 1991 68(1)(a)
England and Wales

Updated: 07 June 2021; Ref: scu.87792

Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Ex Parte Duddridge and Others: CA 20 Oct 1995

The Maastricht environmental commitment imposed no binding obligation on a government of itself. The unproven possibility of a medical effect of radiation from power supply lines was no justification for new rules.
Times 26-Oct-1995, Independent 20-Oct-1995
Electricity Act 1989, Maastricht Treaty
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Ex Parte Duddridge and Others QBD 4-Oct-1994
Secretary of State was under no duty to issue regulations to protect against low level electromagnetic radiation. . .

Cited by:
Appealed toRegina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Ex Parte Duddridge and Others QBD 4-Oct-1994
Secretary of State was under no duty to issue regulations to protect against low level electromagnetic radiation. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2021; Ref: scu.87951

Thames Water Utilities Ltd v Bromley Magistrates’ Court: Admn 20 Mar 2013

Sewage had escaped from the company’s facilities. They now sought judicial review of their conviction under the 1990 Act, saying there had been no ‘deposit’ of sewage.
Held: The request for review failed: ‘the answer to the question whether the unintended escape of sewage amounted to a ‘deposit’ within s.33(1)(a) of the Act, is not to be found in dictionary definitions. However, when construed in the context both of sub-section (1)(a) and s.33 as a whole, the preponderance of the argument favours and clearly so, the word ‘deposit’ including unintended escapes. The contrary argument, that this construction results in an unsatisfactory overlap with s.34 of the Act, falls to the ground because s.34 is inapplicable in such circumstances. Conscious though I am that s.33 gives rise to a penal provision, I am satisfied that the usual and strong presumption of a mens rea is here displaced.’
Gross LJ, Singh J
[2013] EWHC 472 (Admin)
Bailii
Environmental Protection Act 1990 33(1)(a)
Citing:
CitedShanks and Mcewan (Southern Waste Services) Ltd v Environment Agency Admn 14-Oct-1997
Mance J explained the need to construe the statute so as to identify the rule of attribution appropriate to the relevant statutory offence: ‘The rule of attribution appropriate to a particular situation (e.g., the nature and level of conduct or . .
CitedMilton Keynes District Council v Fuller and Another Admn 23-Jun-2011
The magistrates had concluded that the movement of waste, previously tipped by others in the entrance to the Respondents’ field, did not amount to a ‘deposit’, within s.33(1)(a) of the 1990 Act. The Council appealed against dismissal of it . .
CitedRegina (Thames Water Utilities) v The South East London Division, Bromley Magistrates’ Court ECJ 8-Feb-2007
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court) – Treatment of waste water Directive 75/442 Directive 91/271 Waste Concept . .
CitedGateway Professional Services (Management) Ltd v Kingston Upon Hull City Council Admn 8-Mar-2004
An employee of the appellant had deposited a number of black bags containing commercial office waste on the land adjoining the appellant’s own premises. The prosecutor said that the deposit of the bags of waste in those circumstances amounted to an . .
CitedScott and Another v Westminster City Council CA 20-Mar-1995
A vendor’s ‘hot chestnut’ stall was an ‘item deposited on highway’ and could be removed by the Council under the 1980 Act. Waite LJ said: ‘The verb ‘to deposit’ is a term of wide connotation, apt to describe any state of affairs in which one object . .
CitedRemet Co Ltd v Newham London Borough Council QBD 1981
The defendants, when loading non-ferrous metal swarf on to lorries standing on the highway, from time to time miscalculated the available space in a lorry being loaded, and some of the swarf accidentally fell on to the road. In respect of three such . .
CitedGammon (Hong Kong) Ltd v A-G of Hong Kong PC 1984
Lord Scarman expressed the purpose of imposing strict liability within criminal law: ‘In their Lordships’ opinion, the law relevant to this appeal may be stated in the following propositions . . : (1) there is a presumption of law that mens rea is . .
CitedSweet v Parsley HL 23-Jan-1969
Mens Rea essential element of statutory Offence
The appellant had been convicted under the Act 1965 of having been concerned in the management of premises used for smoking cannabis. This was a farmhouse which she visited infrequently. The prosecutor had conceded that she was unaware that the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 May 2021; Ref: scu.471921

A M L Van Rouge v Dagelijks Bestuur Van Het Waterschap De Dommel (Gebr Van Aarle Bv, Third Party): ECJ 15 Oct 1999

ECJ The directive relating to the discharge of dangerous substances into aquatic environments, included the precipitation of contaminated steam onto a water course. Pollution is defined as discharge into the water, and discharge as introduction of listed substances into the water. The contaminated steam settled upon the water and contaminated it. Not to prosecute would limit the effectiveness of the Directive.
Times 15-Oct-1999, C-231/97, [1999] EUECJ C-231/97
Bailii
Council Directive 76/464/EEC On pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment.
European

Updated: 20 April 2021; Ref: scu.77590

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.’
Laws, Pitchford LJJ, Sir John Chadwick
[2012] EWCA Civ 897, [2013] Env LR 4
Bailii
Directive 2008/50/EC
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: . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 April 2021; Ref: scu.461947

Greenwich London Borough Council v Secretary of State for Environment and Another: CA 2 Mar 1993

When the Secretary of State considered the offer of land in substitution for other land, an ancient woodland and site of special scientific interest, which was sought to be compulsorily acquired for a roadway, he was entitled to assess whether the exchanged land would be equally advantageous at the time when the exchange would take place, and to exercise a degree of flexibility.
Ind Summary 15-Mar-1993, Times 02-Mar-1993, [1993] CLY 439
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Acquisition of Land Act 1981 19
England and Wales

Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.81017

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 defendants were unaware of the existence of the defect and ‘could not be criticised for failing to discover it,’ the pollution had nevertheless been caused by their operation of the factory. So the fact that the negligent installation of the pipes had been unforeseeable was no defence. Liability for river pollution is strict. It existed even where the owner had no knowledge of a leak in a pipe put in before he acquired the land. Whether he had caused the pollution remained a question of fact for the jury.
Lloyd LJ
Independent 30-Aug-1994, Times 04-Aug-1994, [1994] Env LR 131
Water Resources Act 1991 85(1) 209
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedEmpress 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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 April 2021; Ref: scu.86463

Deutsche Bank Ag v Total Global Steel Ltd: ComC 11 May 2012

The claimant claimed damages of 5,781,000 Euros from the defendant for breach of four contracts by which DB acquired from TGS through the European Union Emissions Trading System for 5,737,440 Euros a total of 492,000 Certified Emissions Reductions (‘CERs’), which are instruments created under the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (‘UNFCCC’). DB’s claim is that the contracts provided that the CERs ‘may be used for determining compliance with emissions limitation commitments pursuant to and in accordance with the [EUETS]’. They complain that the CERs that they acquired from TGS did not meet that requirement (i) because they had previously been ‘surrendered’ under the EUETS, that is to say exchanged for allowances, and the European Commission, as regulator of the EUETS, had introduced and published in December 2009 and January 2010 a check that prevented surrendered CERs from being used for compliance purposes under it, and (ii) in any case, they argue, surrendered CERs could not legally have been so used. (I shall adopt the expression ‘surrendered CERs’ as a convenient label, and I shall refer to CERs that have not been surrendered as ‘conventional CERs’.
Andrew Smith J
[2012] EWHC 1201 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 04 April 2021; Ref: scu.457627

Sinclair v Information Commissioner, Department of Energy and Climate Change: FTTGRC 8 Nov 2011

FTTGC Environmental Information Regulations – disclosure of information – exception for internal communications – regulation 12(4)(e) – exception where adverse effect on international relations – regulation 12(5)(a) – public interest balance
[2011] UKFTT EA – 2011 – 0052 (GRC
Bailii
Environmental Information Regulations 2004
England and Wales

Updated: 20 March 2021; Ref: scu.449720

MWH Associates Ltd v Wrexham County Borough Council: UTLC 19 Jul 2011

UTLC COMPENSATION – modification order – review of mineral planning permission under Environment Act 1995 – basis of claim – whether depreciation of the value of land or loss of profits – Habitats Regulations 1994 – proposed use contrary to law – insufficient evidence to establish depreciation of value of land – whether loss directly attributable to modification order – claimant not intending to work the land – derogation licence to translocate great crested newts would not have been granted in absence of modification order – no compensation payable
[2011] UKUT 269 (LC)
Bailii
Environment Act 1995
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromMWH Associates Ltd v Wrexham County Borough Council CA 28-Nov-2012
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 March 2021; Ref: scu.445671

The Air Transport Association of America and Others: ECJ 6 Oct 2011

ECJ Environment – Greenhouse gases – Emission allowances – EU scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading (‘EU emissions trading scheme’) – Inclusion of aviation activities – International aviation – Public international law – Compatibility of secondary European Union legislation with international agreements and customary international law – Directives 2003/87/EC and 2008/101/EC
C-366/10, [2011] EUECJ C-366/10, [2011] EUECJ C-366/10
Bailii, Bailii
European

Updated: 16 March 2021; Ref: scu.445414

Buglife, Regina (on The Application of) v Natural England: Admn 30 Mar 2011

The court established a new principle (concerning time limits for starting judicial review proceedings and the effect of the ECJ’s decision in Uniplex) and extended the law (concerning multi-stage EIAs provided for by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2008).
Anthony Thornton QC J
[2011] EWHC 746 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 11 March 2021; Ref: scu.440073

Pesce And Others v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri and others: ECJ 9 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Preliminary reference – Protection of plant health – Directive 2000/29 / EC – Protection against the introduction and spread in the EU of organisms harmful to plants or plant products – Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/789 – measures to prevent the introduction and spread in the Xylella fastidiosa Union (Wells and Raju) – Article 6, paragraph 2 a) – Obligation to carry out the immediate removal of host plants, whatever their health status, in a 100 meter radius around the infected plant – Validity – Article 16, paragraph 3 of Directive 2000/29 – Principle of proportionality – precautionary principle – Obligation to state reasons – Right to compensation
ECLI:EU:C:2016:428, C-78/16, [2016] EUECJ C-78/16
Bailii
Directive 2000/29 / EC
European

Updated: 08 March 2021; Ref: scu.565628

Regina on the Application of Feakins v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: CA 4 Nov 2003

The applicant farmer had substantial volumes of potentially contaminated carcasses on his land. The respondent derogated from the European regulations which would have arranged for the disposal of the carcasses. The respondent challenged the standing of the applicant to seek review of the decision. The judge acknowledged the possibility that the applicant had only his private interests at heart, but considered that he could proceed because of the significance of the decision under review. The applicant’s motive was capable of being relevant, but was not such here as to make the application an abuse.
Dyson LJ addressed the question of abuse of process in the context of Judicial Review proceedings, saying: ‘In my judgment, if a claimant has no sufficient private interest to support a claim to standing, then he should not be accorded standing merely because he raises an issue in which there is, objectively speaking, a public interest. As Sedley J said in R v Somerset County Council, Ex p Dixon [1997] JPL 1030, when considering the issue of standing, the court had to ensure that the claimant was not prompted by an ill motive, and was not a mere busybody or a trouble-maker. Thus, if a claimant seeks to challenge a decision in which he has no private law interest, it is difficult to conceive of circumstances in which the court will accord him standing, even where there is a public interest in testing the lawfulness of the decision, if the claimant is acting out of ill-will or for some other improper purpose. It is an abuse of process to permit a claimant to bring a claim in such circumstances. If the real reason why a claimant wishes to challenge a decision in which, objectively, there is a public interest is not that he has a genuine concern about the decision, but some other reason, then that is material to the question whether he should be accorded standing.’
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Dyson
[2003] EWCA Civ 1546, Times 07-Nov-2003, Gazette 02-Jan-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 1761
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedMount Cook Land Ltd and Another v Westminster City Council CA 14-Oct-2003
The applicants had sought judicial review of the defendant’s grant of planning permission for the redevelopment of the former CandA building in Oxford Street. Though the application for leave to apply had been successful, and a full hearing took . .
Appeal fromFeakins v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 20-Dec-2002
. .
See AlsoDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Feakins and Another ChD 26-Nov-2004
The farmer complained that the department had, during the foot and mouth outbreak destroyed animals which did not belong to the owner of the land. The department said that the farmer had disposed of his land at an undervalue to defeat his creditors. . .

Cited by:
See AlsoDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Feakins and Another ChD 26-Nov-2004
The farmer complained that the department had, during the foot and mouth outbreak destroyed animals which did not belong to the owner of the land. The department said that the farmer had disposed of his land at an undervalue to defeat his creditors. . .
CitedLand Securities Plc and Others v Fladgate Fielder (A Firm) CA 18-Dec-2009
The claimants wanted planning permission to redevelop land. The defendant firm of solicitors, their tenants, had challenged the planning permission. The claimants alleged that that opposition was a tortious abuse because its true purpose was to . .
Now set asideFeakins and Another v Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs CA 8-Jun-2006
The claimants sought to re-open their appeal saying that the respondent department had failed properly to describe the workings of the clawback scheme under which its claim had been made.
Held: A DEFRA official had provided materially . .
CitedGood Law Project Ltd and Others, Regina (on Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 18-Feb-2021
Failure to Publish Contracts awards details
Challenge to alleged failures by the Secretary of State to comply with procurement law and policy in relation to contracts for goods and services awarded following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held: The contracts had been awarded under . .
See AlsoDepartment for Environment Food and Rural Affairs v Feakins and Another ChD 26-Nov-2004
. .
See AlsoFeakins and Another v Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Civ 1513) CA 9-Dec-2005
The department complained that the defendants had entered into a transaction with their farm at an undervalue so as to defeat its claim for recovery of sums due. The transaction used the grant of a tenancy by the first chargee.
Held: The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 March 2021; Ref: scu.187505

Azienda Agro-Zootecnica Franchini And Eolica Di Altamura: ECJ 14 Apr 2011

ECJ Environment – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 79/409/EEC – Conservation of wild birds – Natura 2000 – Directive 2001/77/EC – Renewable energy sources – National rules – Prohibition of location of wind turbines not intended for self-consumption in sites forming part of the ecological network Natura 2000 – No assessment of implications of project for site.
C-2/10, [2011] EUECJ C-2/10
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.433375

Office Of Communications v UK Information Commissioner: ECJ 10 Mar 2011

ECJ (Opinion of Advocate General Kokott) Directive 2003/4/EC – Access to environmental information – Exceptions – Public interest in disclosure – Interest served by refusal – Balancing exercise – Cumulation of interests.
C-71/10, [2011] EUECJ C-71/10
Bailii
Directive 2003/4/EC on public access to environmental information
European
Cited by:
OpinionOffice Of Communications v UK Information Commissioner ECJ 28-Jul-2011
ECJ Public access to environmental information – Directive 2003/4/EC – Article 4 – Exceptions to the right of access – Request for access involving more than one of the interests protected under Article 4(2) of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 March 2021; Ref: scu.430719

Commission v Ireland C-50/09: ECJ 3 Mar 2011

ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 85/337/EEC – Obligation of the competent environmental authority to carry out an assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment – More than one competent authority – Need to ensure an assessment of the interaction between factors likely to be directly or indirectly affected – Application of the directive to demolition works.
ECLI:EU:C:2011:109, [2011] EUECJ C-50/09, [2011] PTSR 1122, [2011] ECR I-873, [2011] Env LR 25
Bailii
European
Cited by:
CitedHS2 Action Alliance Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Transport and Another SC 22-Jan-2014
The government planned to promote a large scale rail development (HS2), announcing this in a command paper. The main issues, in summary, were, first, whether it should have been preceded by strategic environmental assessment, under the relevant . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.430336

Tate and Lyle Industries Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Another: Admn 2 Nov 2010

The claimant sought judicial review of the 2009 Order, complaining of the reduced allocation to it of a renewables obligation certificate.
Held: The claim failed.
Moses LJ
[2010] EWHC 2752 (Admin)
Bailii
Renewables Obligation Order 2009, Directive 2001/77/EC on the promotion of electricity from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromTate and Lyle Sugars Ltd v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Another CA 3-Jun-2011
The company had developed a means of generating electricity from their excess sugar supplies, and challenged the support given to it by the respondent and in particular that the 2009 Order allowed the respondent to favour some types of energy . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 February 2021; Ref: scu.425656

Ogale Community and Others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Another: CA 14 Feb 2018

The claimants sought damages after widescale historic damage to areas of Nigeria by subsidiaries of the defendant. The defendant said that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear such a claim.
Held: The claimants had not established the existence of a duty of care in the respondent, and the case would be bound to fail.
Sir Geoffrey Vos CH, Sales, Simon LJJ
[2018] EWCA Civ 191, [2018] WLR(D) 92
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
At FTTHRH Emere Godwin Bebe Okpabi and Others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Another TCC 26-Jan-2017
Claims for damages arising from failures in oil pipeline management in Nigeria. . .

Cited by:
Appeal from (CA)Okpabi and Others v Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Another SC 12-Feb-2021
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 February 2021; Ref: scu.605187

Ethos Recycling Ltd v Barking and Dagenham Magistrates Court: Admn 13 Nov 2009

The company sought judicial review of the deceision by the respondent to issue an abatement notice. It said that under section 79 of the 1990 Act, such a notice fell within the term ‘summary proceedings’ and that therefore the consent of the secretary of State should first have been obtained.
Held: The notice did not require the consent suggested. Historically urgent action was often required, and requiring the consent would go against that. A notice was not itself the commencement of proceedings. Consent would be required when, on a non-compliance, the authority wanted to take the matter forward to the court.
Lord Justice Scott Baker and Mr Justice Cranston
[2009] EWHC 2885 (Admin), Times 02-Feb-2010
Bailii
Environmental Protection Act 1990 79(10)
England and Wales

Updated: 19 February 2021; Ref: scu.380331

Belize Alliance of Conservation Non-Governmental Organisations v Department of the Environment and Another (No 2): PC 13 Aug 2003

(Belize) The applicants sought an interim order preventing continuation of the building of a dam, saying that the environmental damage had not been properly aanticipated.
Held: The Board of the Council did have power to grant an interim injunction to preserve the situation pending a final ruling. That power derived from the power of any superior court to supervise its own procedures. The principles to be applied were the general ones applying those from American Cynamid, amended as necessary to accord with the context of public law. However, here the very substantial works were already under way, the claimants were understandably unable to undertake for any damages, and the balance of convenience lay against the applicants, and no order should be made.
Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe Sir Martin Nourse Sir Andrew Leggatt
[2003] UKPC 63, Times 25-Sep-2003, Gazette 16-Oct-2003, [2004] 2 P and CR 2, [2004] Env LR 16, [2003] 1 WLR 2839
Bailii, PC, PC
Commonwealth
Citing:
CitedThomas Reckley v The Minister of Public Safety and Immigration and others (Petition for a stay of execution) PC 13-Jun-1995
(The Bahamas) If a serious constitutional issue is fairly raised by an appeal as to the constitutionality of the death penalty, then the death penalty must be stayed. . .
CitedHer Majesty’s Attorney General v Punch Limited and another HL 12-Dec-2002
A former MI5 agent, Mr Shayler, was to be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act, and an injunction against publication was granted. The respondent published further works by Mr Shayler, and now appealed a finding that it had acted in contempt of . .
CitedAmerican Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd HL 5-Feb-1975
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases
The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of . .

Cited by:
See AlsoBelize Alliance of Conservation Non-Governmental Organisations v The Department of the Environment Belize Electric Company Limited PC 29-Jan-2004
PC (Belize) Lord Walker said: ‘It is now clear that proceedings for judicial review should not be conducted in the same manner as hard fought commercial litigation. A Respondent authority owes a duty to the court . .
CitedTweed v Parades Commission for Northern Ireland HL 13-Dec-2006
(Northern Ireland) The applicant sought judicial review of a decision not to disclose documents held by the respondent to him saying that the refusal was disproportionate and infringed his human rights. The respondents said that the documents were . .
CitedCherry, Reclaiming Motion By Joanna Cherry QC MP and Others v The Advocate General SCS 11-Sep-2019
(First Division, Inner House) The reclaimer challenged dismissal of her claim for review of the recent decision for the prorogation of the Parliament at Westminster.
Held: Reclaim was granted. The absence of reasons allowed the court to infer . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 February 2021; Ref: scu.185741

Regina v Greenwich London Borough Council, Ex Parte Williams and Others: QBD 29 Dec 1995

QBD A local authority has no power to close a road to control pollution from motor vehicles. Air pollution danger from traffic was not a sufficient ‘likelihood of danger.’
Ind Summary 29-Jan-1996, Times 29-Dec-1995
Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 14
England and Wales

Updated: 15 February 2021; Ref: scu.86767

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

ECJ Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC – Waste – Management plans – Suitable sites and installations for waste disposal – Permit granted in the absence of a management plan containing a map specifying planned locations for disposal sites. The Court referred to the Directive as ‘a policy framework’ . . which need not necessarily describe in minute detail all aspects of current and future waste disposal management, including sites.’ Management plans may not be determinative: ‘ . . management plans cannot in all cases be the only factor which determines the exact location of waste disposal sites, inasmuch as the final decision concerning location in some circumstances depends on the relevant rules relating to land-use planning and, in particular, the consultation and decision-making procedures implemented pursuant to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment . . as amended . . ‘
Advocate General Mishko
C-53/02, [2004] EUECJ C-53/02
Bailii
Directive 75/442/EEC, Directive 91/156/EEC
European
Cited by:
CitedDerbyshire Waste Ltd v Blewett and Another CA 11-Nov-2004
Glapswell Colliery had closed. The owners sought to use it for waste disposal by landfill. The objector had obtained judicial review of the permission granted.
Held: The intention of the Landfill Directive was to discourage its use other than . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 February 2021; Ref: scu.195725

Thames Water Utilities Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Bromley Magistrates Court: Admn 28 Jul 2008

Whether escapes of waste water from a public sewerage system are ‘Directive waste’ within the scope of the Waste Framework Directive, and thus subject to the enforcement authority of the Environment Agency under section 33 of the 1990 Act.
Carnwath LJ, Bean J
[2008] EWHC 1763 (Admin)
Bailii
Environmental Protection Act 1990 33

Updated: 10 February 2021; Ref: scu.272301

Ecologistas En Accion-Coda v Ayuntamiento de Madrid: ECJ 25 Jul 2008

EU Environment And Consumers – Directives 85/337/EEC and 97/11/EC – Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment – Refurbishment and improvement works on urban roads – Whether subject to assessment.
C-142/07, [2008] EUECJ C-142/07
Bailii
Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (85/337/EEC)
European
Cited by:
CitedSave 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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 February 2021; Ref: scu.271121

Commission v Italy – C-263/05: ECJ 18 Dec 2007

ECJ Environment and Consumers – Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Environment Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC – Concept of ‘waste’ – Substances or objects intended for disposal or recovery operations Production residues capable of re-use.
[2007] EUECJ C-263/05
Bailii
Directive 75/442/EEC, Directive 91/156/EEC
European

Updated: 05 February 2021; Ref: scu.262912

International Association of Independent Tanker Owners and others v Secretary of State for Transport: ECJ 20 Nov 2007

ECJ (Environment and Consumers) Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court) (United Kingdom). Directive 2005/35/EC Ship-source pollution Serious negligence United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Marpol)).
C-308/06, [2007] EUECJ C-308/06 – O
Bailii
European
Cited by:
See AlsoInternational Association of Independent Tanker Owners and others v Secretary of State for Transport ECJ 3-Jun-2008
Maritime transport Ship-source pollution Directive 2005/35/EC – Validity United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Marpol 73/78 Convention – Legal effects of the Conventions – Ability to rely on them Serious negligence – Principle of legal . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 February 2021; Ref: scu.261480

Commission v Italy C-255/05: ECJ 5 Jul 2007

ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment – Waste recovery – Implementation of the ‘third line’ of the Brescia waste incinerator – Publicity for the application for a permit – Directives 75/442/EEC, 85/337/EEC and 2000/76/EC.
[2007] EUECJ C-255/05
Bailii
European

Updated: 03 February 2021; Ref: scu.258194

Rampion et Godard, epouse Rampion v Franfinance SA et K par K SAS: ECJ 29 Mar 2007

ECJ Directive 87/102 / EEC Credit for consumption interdependence between the credit agreement and the contract of sale of goods or services financed Terms mention goods or services financed in the credit agreement Applicability of office by the national court of the domestic provisions on the interdependence between the credit agreement and the sales contract adopted in transposition of the Directive
C-429/05, [2007] EUECJ C-429/05, [2008] Bus LR 715, [2007] ECR I-8017
Bailii
European

Updated: 02 February 2021; Ref: scu.251130

Greenpeace Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: CA 31 Oct 2005

[2005] EWCA Civ 1656
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal FromGreenpeace Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 10-Oct-2005
Greenpeace asserted that the respondent had failed to make adequate arrangements to protect the common dolphin from unintended mortality from fishing activities as it was required to do under the Regulation. Measures had been proposed but they were . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 January 2021; Ref: scu.238603

Commission v Spain C-26/04: ECJ 15 Dec 2005

ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 76/160/EEC – Quality of bathing waters – Designation as bathing areas – Directive 79/923/EEC – Quality of shellfish waters – Establishment of a pollution reduction programme.
[2005] EUECJ C-26/04, [2006] Env LR D8, [2005] ECR I-11059
Bailii
European

Updated: 26 January 2021; Ref: scu.236400

Rockware Glass Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Chester City Council and Another: Admn 24 Oct 2005

[2005] EWHC 2250 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromRockware Glass Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Quinn Glass Ltd and Another CA 15-Jun-2006
Challenge to terms of Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control permit . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 January 2021; Ref: scu.231575

EU-Wood-Trading GmbH v Sonderabfall-Management-Gesellschaft Rheinland-Pfalz mbH: ECJ 16 Dec 2004

ECJ Environment – Waste – Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 on shipments of waste – Waste intended for recovery – Objections – Powers of the authority of dispatch – Recovery contravening the requirements of Article 4 of Directive 75/442/EEC or those of national provisions – Power of the authority of dispatch to raise such objections.
[2004] EUECJ C-277/02, C-277/02
Bailii
European

Updated: 22 January 2021; Ref: scu.220612

Regina on the Application of JHM Newsum v Welsh Assembly Government: CA 22 Nov 2004

The claimant had been granted judicial review of a refusal to translocate a population of great crested newts. They wanted to quarry the land occipied by the newts, and planning permission had been granted for this work. The respondent appealed.
Held: The grant of planning permission itself did not demonstrate that the quarrying was a purpose to be described as ‘an imperative reason of overriding public interest.’ The Assembly were entitled to take the view, independent of the planning authorities, as to whether the purpose on which the Trustees relied did provide an imperative reason of overriding public interest. On that basis the challenge to their decision was rejected.
Lord Justice Tuckey Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Mantell
[2004] EWCA (Civ) 1565, Times 07-Dec-2004
Bailii
Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994 44(2)(e), European Directive on the Conservation of Natural habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora [92/43/EEC]
England and Wales

Updated: 21 January 2021; Ref: scu.220048

Tombesi: ECJ 25 Jun 1997

(Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/9
C-224/95, [1997] EUECJ C-224/95
Bailii
Council Directive 91/689/EEC, Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/9, Council Directive 91/156/EEC
European
Citing:
See AlsoEuro Tombesi, Santella etc ECJ 25-Jun-1997
ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 . .
See AlsoTombesi and Others ECJ 25-Jun-1997
ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 . .

Cited by:
See AlsoCriminal proceedings against Tombesi and others ECJ 25-Jun-1997
ECJ Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93
Waste includes substances discarded by their owners, even if they ”have a commercial value and are . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 January 2021; Ref: scu.215812

Tombesi and Others: ECJ 25 Jun 1997

ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93
C-330/94, [1997] EUECJ C-330/94
Bailii
Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93, Directive 91/689/EEC, Directive 91/156/EEC
European
Citing:
See AlsoEuro Tombesi, Santella etc ECJ 25-Jun-1997
ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 . .

Cited by:
See AlsoTombesi ECJ 25-Jun-1997
(Environment And Consumers) Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/9 . .
See AlsoCriminal proceedings against Tombesi and others ECJ 25-Jun-1997
ECJ Waste – Definition – Council Directives 91/156/EEC and 91/689/EEC – Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93
Waste includes substances discarded by their owners, even if they ”have a commercial value and are . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 January 2021; Ref: scu.215813

Landelijke Vereniging tot Behoud van de Waddenzee and Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Vogels v Staatssecretaris van Landbouw, etc: ECJ 7 Sep 2004

ECJ Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna – Concept of ‘plan’ or ‘project’ – Assessment of the implications of certain plans or projects for the protected site.
‘other interventions in the natural surroundings and landscape including those involving the extraction of mineral resources’ – clearly applies to activities, such as mining or quarrying, or dragging for cockles.
C-127/02, [2004] EUECJ C-127/02, [2005] Env LR 14, [2005] 2 CMLR 31, [2004] NPC 136, [2005] All ER (EC) 353, [2004] ECR-7405
Bailii
European
Cited by:
CitedEdwards, 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 . .
CitedBoggis and Another v Natural England CA 20-Oct-2009
boggis_natengCA2009
Natural England appealed against the quashing of an SSSI.
Held: The notification of an SSSI was not the making of a plan as respects the land affected, but the flagging up of it. The real purpose of the proceedings was to allow the land owners . .
CitedSave 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 . .
CitedChampion, Regina (on The Application of) v North Norfolk District Council and Another SC 22-Jul-2015
‘The appeal concerns a proposed development by Crisp Maltings Group Ltd (‘CMGL’) at their Great Ryburgh plant in Norfolk, in the area of the North Norfolk District Council (‘the council’). It was opposed by the appellant, Mr Matthew Champion, a . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 January 2021; Ref: scu.214233

King and others v Brandywine Reinsurance Co (UK) Ltd: QBD 11 May 2004

Mr Justice Coleman Colman
[2004] EWHC 1033 (Comm)
Bailii
Cited by:
Appeal fromKing v Brandywine Reinsurance Company CA 10-Mar-2005
Excess of Loss reinsurance. In the civil courts of England and Wales is that (with one obvious exception) expert evidence on the domestic law is inadmissible. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 January 2021; Ref: scu.196703

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 approach correctly, and the role of the court is to conduct a Wednesbury review of the decision of the council. That review was also correct. It was not a Gillespie case. The committee already had substantial information before it. A planning authority could not rely upon undertakings and conditions to secure compliance with the requirements for an assessment.
Lord Justice Laws Ord Justice Dyson And Lord Justice Carnwath
[2004] Env LR 391, [2003] EWCA Civ 1408, Times 31-Oct-2003
Bailii
Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988, Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 17 June 1995 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedMarleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA ECJ 13-Nov-1990
Sympathetic construction of national legislation
LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC . .
CitedAannemersbedriijf 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 . .
CitedBerkeley v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames CA 29-Jun-2001
There is no obligation to refer every application to the Secretary of State where an objector raised a plausible argument that an environmental impact assessment might be needed. In this case the application did not fall within Schedule I, and nor . .
CitedRegina 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 . .
CitedSmith v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and Regions and others CA 5-Mar-2003
The court distilled four principles in deciding whether an environmental impact assessment was to be required. At the outline consent stage the planning authority must have sufficient details of any impact on the environment and of any mitigation to . .
CitedBellway 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 . .
CitedWorld Wildlife Fund and Others v Autonome Provinz Bozen and Others ECJ 12-Oct-1999
The court considered a project for converting Bolzano airport in Italy from military to civilian use. The national law did not require the project to be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The court asked whether the national law . .
CitedBown, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Transport Admn 26-Mar-2003
The court rejected objections to a proposed bypass on the grounds that it would interfere with otter habitats, and an area which should be designated as a Special Protection Area for Birds.
Held: The Wild Birds Directive had not seperately . .
CitedBurkett, Regina (on the Application of) v Hammersmith and Fulham Admn 15-May-2003
Outline permission was granted for a large development, reserving certain matters. The applicant challenged the permission saying that the application had not included the information required under the Regulations, and the authority had failed to . .
Appeal fromJones, Regina (on the Application Of) v Mansfield District Council Admn 20-Jan-2003
. .

Cited by:
CitedYounger 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 . .
CitedRichardson and Orme v North Yorkshire County Council CA 19-Dec-2003
The claimants appealed against an order dismissing their application for a judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission. They contended that a councillor with an interest in the matter had wrongfully not been excluded from the . .
CitedChampion, Regina (on The Application of) v North Norfolk District Council and Another SC 22-Jul-2015
‘The appeal concerns a proposed development by Crisp Maltings Group Ltd (‘CMGL’) at their Great Ryburgh plant in Norfolk, in the area of the North Norfolk District Council (‘the council’). It was opposed by the appellant, Mr Matthew Champion, a . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 January 2021; Ref: scu.186820

SITA C-116/01: ECJ 3 Apr 2003

ECJ (Judgment) Environment – Waste – Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 – Directive 75/442/EEC – Treatment of waste in several stages – Use of waste as fuel in the cement industry and use of incineration residues as raw material in cement manufacture- Classification as a recovery operation or as a disposal operation – Concept of the use of waste principally as a fuel or other means to generate energy
[2003] 2 CMLR 4, [2004] QB 262, [2003] ECR I-2969, C-116/01, [2003] EUECJ C-116/01, [2004] 2 WLR 259
Bailii
European

Updated: 09 January 2021; Ref: scu.180817

Commission v Greece C-103/00: ECJ 30 Jan 2002

ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Protection of species.
Advocate General Leger explained article 1(I) of the Directive: ‘conservation status is regarded as ‘favourable’ when population dynamics data on the species concerned indicate that it is maintaining itself on a long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats, that the natural range of the species is neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced for the foreseeable future, and that there is, and probably will continue to be a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its populations on a long-term basis.
the combined effect of those provisions is apparently that a system of strict protection of an animal species of Community interest means a set of co-ordinated measures, of a preventative nature, which ensure in the long term that the population of the species in question is maintained or restored in the type of natural habitat to which it belongs. This assumes that there is a sufficiently large natural habitat for the species in question.’
Advocate General Leger
[2002] ECR I-1147, [2002] EUECJ C-103/00
Bailii
Directive 92/43/EEC 1(I)
European
Cited by:
CitedMorge, Regina (on The Application of) v Hampshire County Council CA 10-Jun-2010
morge_hampshireCA10
Over time, an abandoned railway line had become a habitat for local wildlife. The claimant now objected to the grant of planning permission for a light railway.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. For an act to fall within 12(1)(b) of the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 January 2021; Ref: scu.167572

Furness and Others v Thames Water Services Ltd, Environment Agency: Admn 17 Dec 2001

The Environment Agency had granted a licence for the incineration of waste, and this was challenged by the claimants, on the basis of the respondents having failed to comply with the procedures required by the Act and Regulations. The regulations included transitional procedures. They said the Agency had no standing under the Act to issue a licence.
Held: The transitional provisions were not easy, but had been navigated correctly by the Environment Agency. The Agency had considered the report governing these matters which did not in any event have the force of law. The application failed.
Turner J
[2001] EWHC Admin 1058
Bailii
Environmental Protection Act 1990 7 7(4), Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000 9, Council Directive 96/61/EC Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control

Updated: 07 January 2021; Ref: scu.167369

Tridon, Federation departementale des chasseurs de l’Isere, and Federation Rhone-Alpes de protection de la nature (Frapna), section Isere: ECJ 23 Oct 2001

ECJ Wild fauna and flora – Endangered species – Application in the Community of the Washington Convention
C-510/99, [2001] EUECJ C-510/99, [2001] ECR I-7777, [2002] All ER (EC) 534, ECLI:EU:C:2001:559, [2002] Env LR D 5, [2003] 1 CMLR 2
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 January 2021; Ref: scu.166765

Regina v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Standley and others: ECJ 29 Apr 1999

(Judgment) Directive 91/676/EEC – Protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources – Identification of waters affected by pollution – Designation of vulnerable zones – Criteria – Validity in the light of the polluter pays principle, the principle that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source, the principle of proportionality and the right to property
C-293/97, [1999] EUECJ C-293/97
Bailii
European

Updated: 06 January 2021; Ref: scu.162206

Commission v Ireland: ECJ 21 Sep 1999

ECJ (Judgment) Environment – Directive 85/337/EEC – Assessment of the effects of certain public or private projects – Setting of thresholds
J.-P. Puissochet, P
C-392/96, [1999] EUECJ C-392/96, [2000] Env LR D15, [2000] QB 636, [2000] 2 WLR 958, [1999] ECR I-5901, [1999] 3 CMLR 727, [1999] 4 PLR 107
Bailii
Directive 85/337/EEC

Updated: 06 January 2021; Ref: scu.162001