Jenkins v Gloucestershire County Council

Jenkins v Gloucestershire County Council

The Council failed to comply with the publicity requirements of the EIA Regulations by not properly advertising and making available for public inspection additional substantive information (the Advisory Note on flood mitigation) for the required period. This breach invalidated the decision-making process,...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Esmond Jenkins; Defendant: Gloucestershire County Council; First Interested Party: Moreton C Cullimore (Gravels) Limited; Second Interested Party: Cotswold Water Park Society; Third Interested Party: Environment Agency
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Claim for judicial review allowed in part
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Environmental Impact Assessment, Planning Permission, Mineral Extraction, Public Consultation, Noise and Dust Pollution, Flood Risk
Planning Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Environmental Impact Assessment Planning Permission Mineral Extraction Public Consultation +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Esmond Jenkins

Claimant

Gloucestershire County Council

Defendant

Moreton C Cullimore (Gravels) Limited

First Interested Party

Cotswold Water Park Society

Second Interested Party

Environment Agency

Third Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Gloucestershire County Council misapplied Policy A4 of the Gloucestershire Minerals Local Plan in granting planning permission for mineral extraction outside Preferred Areas
  2. 2 Whether the Council failed to properly consider noise and dust impacts, including the views of the Environmental Health Officer and relevant planning guidance
  3. 3 Whether the Council failed to comply with the publicity requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999 regarding flood risk information

Ratio Decidendi

The Council failed to comply with the publicity requirements of the EIA Regulations by not properly advertising and making available for public inspection additional substantive information (the Advisory Note on flood mitigation) for the required period. This breach invalidated the decision-making process, regardless of whether the outcome would have been the same, as public participation is a mandatory procedural requirement under the EIA regime.

Court Disposition

Claim for judicial review allowed in part

Orders

  • Declaration that the Council failed to comply with the publicity requirements of the EIA Regulations; remedy, costs, and permission to appeal to be determined after further argument