Packham, R (on the application of) v High Speed Two (Hs2) Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1004 (31 July 2020)

Packham, R (on the application of) v High Speed Two (Hs2) Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1004 (31 July 2020)

The Government's decision to proceed with HS2 was a political judgment taken after a lawful statutory process that included environmental assessment. There was no legal requirement for the Oakervee review or the Government to repeat or expand upon those assessments. The claim was brought promptly within the three-month period. The grounds advanced were unarguable and did not meet the threshold for judicial intervention under the Wednesbury standard.

Citation
[2020] EWCA Civ 1004
Parties
Applicant: Christopher Packham; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Transport; Second Respondent: The Prime Minister; Interested Party: High Speed Two (HS2) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Divisional Court Refusal of Permission
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Promptness of Claim, Environmental Impact Assessment, Government Decision Making, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Climate Change Obligations, Infrastructure Projects
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law Constitutional Law Judicial Review Promptness of Claim Environmental Impact Assessment Government Decision Making +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 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Packham

Applicant

Secretary of State for Transport

First Respondent

The Prime Minister

Second Respondent

High Speed Two (HS2) Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Divisional Court Refusal of Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Government's decision to proceed with HS2 was unlawful for failure to consider environmental effects (ground 2)
  2. 2 Whether the Government failed to consider the effect of HS2 on greenhouse gas emissions in light of the Paris Agreement and Climate Change Act 2008 (ground 3b)
  3. 3 Whether the claim was brought promptly under CPR r.54.5(1)

Ratio Decidendi

The Government's decision to proceed with HS2 was a political judgment taken after a lawful statutory process that included environmental assessment. There was no legal requirement for the Oakervee review or the Government to repeat or expand upon those assessments. The claim was brought promptly within the three-month period. The grounds advanced were unarguable and did not meet the threshold for judicial intervention under the Wednesbury standard.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Permission to apply for judicial review refused.
  • No interim relief granted.