Kolb, R (on the application of) v FCC Environment UK Ltd

Kolb, R (on the application of) v FCC Environment UK Ltd

The County Council lawfully applied the sequential approach to flood risk at the strategic level, the flood risk assessment was robust and accepted by the Environment Agency, there was no procedural unfairness or misleading information, and the requirements of the Hazardous Substances Act 1990 were not breached. The claim was also brought out of time without good reason. Permission for judicial review is refused.

Parties
Claimant: Kenneth Kolb; Defendant: Buckinghamshire County Council; Interested Party: FCC Environment UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Permission Application and Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Permission to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Flood Risk Assessment, Sequential Test, Hazardous Waste Disposal, Judicial Review Procedure, Delay in Judicial Review, Hazardous Substances Act, National Planning Policy Framework (nppf), Planning Permission Process
Planning Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Flood Risk Assessment Sequential Test Hazardous Waste Disposal Judicial Review Procedure Delay in Judicial Review +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Kolb

Claimant

Buckinghamshire County Council

Defendant

FCC Environment UK Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Permission Application and Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the County Council lawfully applied the sequential test for flood risk under national planning policy
  2. 2 Whether the flood risk assessment was properly conducted and relied upon
  3. 3 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the planning process

Ratio Decidendi

The County Council lawfully applied the sequential approach to flood risk at the strategic level, the flood risk assessment was robust and accepted by the Environment Agency, there was no procedural unfairness or misleading information, and the requirements of the Hazardous Substances Act 1990 were not breached. The claim was also brought out of time without good reason. Permission for judicial review is refused.

Court Disposition

Permission to apply for judicial review refused