“The High Court has overturned a decision by the Environment Agency to designate land along a 36 mile stretch of the Manchester Ship Canal as a high risk flood zone.”
OUT-LAW.com, 21st June 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“The Government’s new powers to remove the cap on the level of fines that can be issued by magistrates’ courts in England and Wales could lead to ‘very significant’ future penalties for environmental offences, an expert has warned.”
OUT-LAW.com, 14th June 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“Regulating nanotechnology is fraught with difficulties. Current environmental law simply doesn’t apply on the nano-scale.”
The Guardian, 11th June 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A newsflash, really, confirming that ClientEarth’s claim for a declaration and mandatory order against Defra in respect of air pollution was refused by the Court of Appeal, in line with the judgment below. And the lack of a link to the CA’s judgment because it is not available, I imagine, because the judgment was extempore, and it is being transcribed at the moment. Sadly, that does not necessarily mean it gets onto the public access site, Bailli, in due course: the first instance decision still languishes on subscription-only sites. So all I know is that ClientEarth’s appeal did not find favour with Laws and Pitchford LJJ, sitting with Sir John Chadwick, but this, as ClientEarth explains, may not be the end of the line.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 5th June 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“A High Court Judge has quashed a London borough council’s adoption of a Supplementary Planning Document.”
OUT-LAW.com, 28th May 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“Campaign group Friends of the Earth (FoE) has applied to the High Court to launch a legal challenge against the Forest of Dean District Council’s Core Strategy (CS) and Cinderford area action plan (AAP), which was adopted by the Council in February.”
OUT-LAW.com, 26th April 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“An environmental campaigner’s legal challenge to a housing development has failed.”
OUT-LAW.com, 17th April 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“The statutory contaminated land regime has changed, with the principal change being to the definition of contaminated land. The changes took effect on 6 April.”
OUT-LAW.com, 11th April 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“Campaigners against the HS2 rail scheme have confirmed they will make two court bids to halt the £33bn project.”
BBC News, 3rd April 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Haringey London Borough Council v Mountplace Ltd: [2012] EWHC 698 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 100
“The duty of care imposed on a producer of waste (or anyone else who fell within one of the different categories of waste holder) by section 34(1)(c) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 was a duty to secure the results set out in the subsection which fell to complied with on the occasion of a given transfer of waste, and the question as to what were the reasonable measures applicable to him ‘in that capacity’ to secure those results fell to be answered by reference to his capacity on that occasion in the circumstances prevailing at that time. However, that did not mean that a waste holder could not comply with that duty on the occasion of the transfer by having reference to measures he had already taken on days prior to that occasion in anticipation of that occasion, nor did it preclude the court from considering such measures, or the absence thereof, in determining whether the duty had been complied with.”
WLR Daily, 28th March 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The CA has just held that Collins J was wrong to hold (per my previous post) that the local NGO had a legitimate expectation that the Secretary of State would decide an air pollution issue, rather than leave it to the Environment Agency. In a nutshell, the Inspector (and hence the Secretary of State) was entitled to change his mind on this issue. So the expectation crumbled, and so did this judicial review to quash a decision to allow a waste incinerator to proceed.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 30th March 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Planning minister Greg Clarke has said there should be a presumption against the building of more out-of-town shopping centres, and insisted the green belt would continue to be protected, as he announced the biggest shakeup of the planning system for more than half a century.”
The Guardian, 27th March 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“In this paper we propose to deal with a miscellany of current conundrums associated with important changes in the law in relation to planning and environmental legislation. The issues to be addressed are, firstly, the vexed question of the proper approach to the duty to co-operate in the context of local development documents that are already progressing through the system. The paper also addresses recent developments and current initiatives in relation to the funding of environmental litigation so as to address the question of compliance with the Aarhus Convention and the legislative follow-up to Jackson LJ’s proposals in respect of costs. Finally, there is discussion in relation to the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 and the approach taken in the Court of Appeal recently.”
Full story (PDF)
No. 5 Chambers, 19th March 2012
Source: www.no5.com
Environmental and planning law newsletter (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, March 2012
Source: www.39essex.com
“In my 2011 post Why be nice? Human rights under pressure I explored the extent to which our limited tendencies to altruism, insofar as they have survived natural selection, could be institutionalised and enforced. In this article I apply the scientific learning on our cooperative instincts to the question of environmental regulation. I argue that whilst we seem to be hard-wired to cooperate, environmental responsibility will only be instilled under certain conditions that resonate with our evolved psychology, and that most modern environmental law fails to acknowledge these conditions.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 20th March 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Welsh Ministers v. RWE Npower Renewables Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 311, reversing RWE Npower Renewables v. Welsh Ministers & Swansea Council [2011] EWHC 1778 (Admin). In my previous post on this case, I summarised the judge’s findings as to why this Planning Inspector had gone wrong at the wind farm inquiry. The Inspector turned down the appeal because the positioning of individual turbines might lead to damage to deep deposits of peat found on this site. The judge, Beatson J, thought the inspector had not explained his reasons for his conclusions in sufficiently clear a form. Nor did the Inspector give the wind farm developer an opportunity to deal with his concerns. So said the judge. But the Court of Appeal disagreed – showing how it is not easy to ‘call’ the merits of these reasons challenges.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 15th March 2012
“It is ‘extremely surprising’ that some local authorities accept cheques from developers making planning applications to compensate for the effect of a development on green space, according to a report of the ruling.”
OUT-LAW.com, 2nd March 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
Flachglas Torgau GmbH v Federal Republic of Germany: (Case C-204/09); [2012] WLR (D) 45
“The option given to member states pursuant to the first sentence of the second sub-paragraph of article 2(2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2003/4/EC of not regarding ‘bodies or institutions acting in a … legislative capacity’ as ‘public authorities’ responsible for guaranteeing access to environmental information, could be applied to ministries to the extent that they participated in the legislative process, in particular by tabling draft laws or giving opinions.”
WLR Daily, 14th February 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Campaigners fighting town and city expansion in Norfolk have won a High Court battle with council planners. The group Snub (Stop Norwich Urbanisation), took action against Broadland District, South Norfolk District and Norwich City councils. The judge ruled that plans for 33,000 properties and the new Norwich northern distributor road had not been properly assessed.”
BBC News, 24th February 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025