Bowen-West v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

Bowen-West v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors

The Court held that the July 2009 proposal was a stand-alone project and not part of an integrated larger scheme. There was insufficient detail about future proposals to require their assessment as cumulative effects under the EIA Regulations. The Secretary of State was entitled to conclude that the Environmental Statement was adequate and that the current permission would not frustrate the aims of the EIA Directive. The Wednesbury standard of review was appropriate, and there was no legal error in the Secretary of State's approach.

Parties
Appellant: Bowen-West; 1st Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; 2nd Respondent: Northamptonshire County Council; 3rd Respondent: Augean PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal (judicial Review) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Administrative Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Environmental Impact Assessment, Town and Country Planning, Judicial Review, Cumulative Effects, EU Law Implementation
Environmental Law Administrative Law Planning Law Environmental Impact Assessment Town and Country Planning Judicial Review Cumulative Effects EU Law Implementation

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bowen-West

Appellant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

1st Respondent

Northamptonshire County Council

2nd Respondent

Augean PLC

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (judicial Review) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Administrative Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State was required to consider the cumulative effects of a larger, future waste disposal scheme when granting permission for the current proposal under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.
  2. 2 Whether the Wednesbury standard or a more intensive standard of judicial review applies to the scope of Environmental Impact Assessment under EU law.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the July 2009 proposal was a stand-alone project and not part of an integrated larger scheme. There was insufficient detail about future proposals to require their assessment as cumulative effects under the EIA Regulations. The Secretary of State was entitled to conclude that the Environmental Statement was adequate and that the current permission would not frustrate the aims of the EIA Directive. The Wednesbury standard of review was appropriate, and there was no legal error in the Secretary of State's approach.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed