Skrytek v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

Skrytek v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

The inspector correctly understood and applied the waste hierarchy as defined in the Waste Framework Directive, considered the environmental outcome, and was entitled to conclude that the proposed facility would treat waste higher up the hierarchy than disposal to landfill. No error of law or inadequacy of reasons was established.

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 (planning) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Waste Hierarchy, Planning Permission, Waste Framework Directive, Energy Recovery, Incineration, Judicial Review, Interpretation of Development Plan, Duty to Give Reasons
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law Waste Hierarchy Planning Permission Waste Framework Directive Energy Recovery Incineration +3 more

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 3 Authorities cited 14 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 (planning) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning inspector misinterpreted or misapplied the waste hierarchy policy under Directive 2008/98/EC (Waste Framework Directive)
  2. 2 Whether the inspector gave adequate reasons for his decision

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector correctly understood and applied the waste hierarchy as defined in the Waste Framework Directive, considered the environmental outcome, and was entitled to conclude that the proposed facility would treat waste higher up the hierarchy than disposal to landfill. No error of law or inadequacy of reasons was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is refused
  • No order to quash the inspector's decision