New Earth Solutions (West) Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Environment Agency [2022] EWHC 1883 (Admin) (19 July 2022)

New Earth Solutions (West) Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Environment Agency [2022] EWHC 1883 (Admin) (19 July 2022)

The Agency lawfully classified the shipment as a D9 disposal operation because the physico-chemical treatment of APCr with sulphuric acid results in a mixture that is ultimately disposed of by landfill. For D9 operations, the final fate of the treated waste is integral to classification. The SITA principle does not apply to D9 operations. The Agency was entitled to consider the entire process, including subsequent landfill, and did not err in law. The claim for judicial review is dismissed.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1883 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: New Earth Solutions (West) Limited; Defendant: Environment Agency; Interested Party: NOAH Solutions AS; Interested Party: Norwegian Environment Agency
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Transfrontier Shipment of Waste, Classification of Waste Operations, Judicial Review of Regulatory Decisions, Waste Framework Directive Interpretation, Recovery Vs Disposal Operations
Environmental Law Administrative Law EU Law Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Classification of Waste Operations Judicial Review of Regulatory Decisions Waste Framework Directive Interpretation Recovery Vs Disposal Operations

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

New Earth Solutions (West) Limited

Claimant

Environment Agency

Defendant

NOAH Solutions AS

Interested Party

Norwegian Environment Agency

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Environment Agency lawfully classified the export of APCr to Norway as a disposal rather than a recovery operation under the Waste Framework Directive and TFS Regulation
  2. 2 Whether the Agency erred in law by failing to treat the substitution of APCr for limestone as a recovery operation
  3. 3 Whether the Agency wrongly considered subsequent neutralisation and landfill in its classification decision

Ratio Decidendi

The Agency lawfully classified the shipment as a D9 disposal operation because the physico-chemical treatment of APCr with sulphuric acid results in a mixture that is ultimately disposed of by landfill. For D9 operations, the final fate of the treated waste is integral to classification. The SITA principle does not apply to D9 operations. The Agency was entitled to consider the entire process, including subsequent landfill, and did not err in law. The claim for judicial review is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Judicial review refused
  • No order for export consent reinstatement