Skrytek v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2013] EWHC 733 (Admin) (28 March 2013)

Skrytek v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2013] EWHC 733 (Admin) (28 March 2013)

The inspector did not err in law in his interpretation or application of the waste hierarchy under the Waste Framework Directive and related domestic law and policy. He was aware of the relevant definitions and policy context, and his reasons were adequate. The decision was not vitiated by any legal error.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 733 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Dorothy Skrytek; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Defendant: Derby City Council; Third Defendant: Resource Recovery Solutions (Derbyshire) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (s.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Waste Management, Interpretation of Waste Hierarchy, Judicial Review of Planning Decisions, Application of EU Directives, Duty to Give Reasons
Planning Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Waste Management Interpretation of Waste Hierarchy Judicial Review of Planning Decisions Application of EU Directives Duty to Give Reasons

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dorothy Skrytek

Claimant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Defendant

Derby City Council

Second Defendant

Resource Recovery Solutions (Derbyshire) Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (s.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning inspector erred in law in interpreting and applying the waste hierarchy under Directive 2008/98/EC (Waste Framework Directive) and related domestic law and policy
  2. 2 Whether the inspector gave adequate reasons for his decision

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector did not err in law in his interpretation or application of the waste hierarchy under the Waste Framework Directive and related domestic law and policy. He was aware of the relevant definitions and policy context, and his reasons were adequate. The decision was not vitiated by any legal error.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Application under s.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 refused
  • No order for quashing the inspector's decision