Hargreaves v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Ors [2012] EWCA Civ 241 (10 February 2012)

Hargreaves v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Ors [2012] EWCA Civ 241 (10 February 2012)

The decision-maker was entitled to take into account elementary mitigating measures at the screening stage, and the screening decision was not invalidated by doing so. The Inspector was not required to refer back to the Secretary of State absent a realistic prospect of a change of mind, and there was no misinterpretation of the word 'likely'.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Civ 241
Parties
Applicant: Hargreaves; Respondents: Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (planning/environmental) / Application for Permission to Appeal (renewed Oral Application)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Environmental Impact Assessment, Screening Decision, Mitigatory Measures, Habitats Directive, Judicial Review, Planning Permission
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law Environmental Impact Assessment Screening Decision Mitigatory Measures Habitats Directive Judicial Review +1 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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hargreaves

Applicant

Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government & Ors

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (planning/environmental) / Application for Permission to Appeal (renewed Oral Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether remedial or mitigatory measures can be considered at the screening stage for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) under the EIA Directive and Habitats Directive
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector was required to refer back to the Secretary of State if there was a realistic prospect of a change of mind regarding significant environmental impacts
  3. 3 Whether the judge misinterpreted the word 'likely' in the context of the EIA and Habitats Directives

Ratio Decidendi

The decision-maker was entitled to take into account elementary mitigating measures at the screening stage, and the screening decision was not invalidated by doing so. The Inspector was not required to refer back to the Secretary of State absent a realistic prospect of a change of mind, and there was no misinterpretation of the word 'likely'.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Application refused.