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 have been signed, and the officer who formed the opinion was authorised. There was no sufficient evidence of contamination of the site to say the officer’s opinion was incorrect or inconsistent. The application was dismissed.
Ouseley J said: ‘the question of whether a local planning authority has sufficient information in order to be able to reach a proper judgment on its screening opinion is a matter for the relevant decision maker whose view is challengeable only on normal judicial review grounds. It is very much a matter of planning judgment, which depends on the facts of the given case. It may not therefore be very persuasive to take the circumstances of one case . . .and to try to use it as a measure by which other cases had been judged . . Indicative material can assist in judging whether the range of uncertainties is so great that a planning officer has insufficient knowledge to judge whether there are likely to be significant environmental effects or whether there are some site layouts or designs for which it can be said that they would be likely and then likely to have significant effects. The planning officer will also be able to make a judgment about the degree to which standard conditions can at that stage be envisaged as sufficient to make unlikely those developments layouts or components which would be likely to have significant environmental effects.’
 EWHC 3058 (Admin),  JPL 950
Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) England and Wales Regulations 1999 (1999 SI 293) 6 8
England and Wales
Cited – Berkeley 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 . .
Cited – Provident Mutual Life Assurance Association v Derbyshire City Council HL 1981
The particular individual on whom the task of forming the relevant opinion had been imposed by statute could not possibly perform all the tasks delegated to the relevant financial officer. He had, and needed, a staff to perform his functions, and it . .
Cited – Cheshire County Council v Secretary of State for the Environment 1988
The court was asked as to the authority of an assistant solicitor to issue an enforcement notice when the standing orders which dealt with delegated powers referred in this context, but not in others, to the County Solicitor and Secretary alone. The . .
Cited – Regina v St Edmundsbury Borough Council (ex parte Walton) Admn 13-Apr-1999
The power to judge whether an application for planning permission would have substantial environmental effect was not capable of being exercised by an officer of the Council without an express delegation of that power. The decision as to whether . .
Cited – Regina (Goodman and Another) v Lewisham London Borough Council CA 14-Feb-2003
Claimants challenged the grant of planning consent for the construction of a storage and distribution facility without first undertaking an environmental impact assessment.
Held: The local authority had concluded that the project could not be . .
Cited – 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 . .
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 – 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 – Regina 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 . .
Cited – British Telecommunications Plc and Bloomsbury Land Investments v Gloucester City Council Admn 26-Nov-2001
The land site to be developed was of archaeological interest and the relevance of a mitigation strategy was considered.
Held: It is for the planning authority to decide whether there are likely to be significant effects on the environment . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham And Others, ex parte Burkett and Another HL 23-May-2002
The applicant sought judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission for a development which would affect her. The authority objected that the application was made after three months after their decision, and so leave should not be . .
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 . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 January 2021; Ref: scu.191217