Berkeley v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 1012 (29 June 2001)

Berkeley v Secretary Of State For Environment, Transport & Regions & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 1012 (29 June 2001)

The Regulations, as applied to urban development projects, do not result in incorrect transposition of the Directive. The Inspector was not obliged to refer the application to the Secretary of State absent plausible evidence of significant environmental effects. The threshold criteria are within the discretion permitted by Community Law, and the appeal fails as the development did not meet EIA requirements under the Regulations.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1012
Parties
Appellant: Berkeley; First Respondent: Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions; Second Respondent: London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames; Third Respondent: Berkeley Homes (West London) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Environmental Impact Assessment, Transposition of EU Directives, Town and Country Planning, Threshold Criteria, Community Law Compliance
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law European Union Law Environmental Impact Assessment Transposition of EU Directives Town and Country Planning Threshold Criteria +1 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Berkeley

Appellant

Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions

First Respondent

London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames

Second Respondent

Berkeley Homes (West London) Ltd

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 properly transpose Council Directives 85/337/EEC as amended by 97/11/EC
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector was obliged to refer the application to the Secretary of State for EIA determination
  3. 3 Whether the threshold criteria in the Regulations are compliant with Community Law

Ratio Decidendi

The Regulations, as applied to urban development projects, do not result in incorrect transposition of the Directive. The Inspector was not obliged to refer the application to the Secretary of State absent plausible evidence of significant environmental effects. The threshold criteria are within the discretion permitted by Community Law, and the appeal fails as the development did not meet EIA requirements under the Regulations.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs awarded to First Respondent
  • No order for costs in relation to Second Respondent