Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council, R (On the Application Of) v Highways England [2018] EWHC 3059 (Admin) (16 November 2018)

Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council, R (On the Application Of) v Highways England [2018] EWHC 3059 (Admin) (16 November 2018)

Highways England was entitled to limit the consultation to the two realistic options, excluding the tunnel, given its high cost and poor value for money. There was no statutory or Licence-based duty to consult on the tunnel option, and the consultation process was not unfair or unlawful in the circumstances.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 3059 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council; Defendant: Highways England
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Consultation Requirements, Infrastructure Planning, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review, Environmental Impact Assessment
Administrative Law Planning Law Environmental Law Consultation Requirements Infrastructure Planning Procedural Fairness Judicial Review Environmental Impact Assessment

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council

Claimant

Highways England

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Highways England acted unlawfully by excluding the tunnel option from public consultation regarding access to the Port of Liverpool
  2. 2 Whether the consultation process was unfair or unlawful under statutory or common law duties

Ratio Decidendi

Highways England was entitled to limit the consultation to the two realistic options, excluding the tunnel, given its high cost and poor value for money. There was no statutory or Licence-based duty to consult on the tunnel option, and the consultation process was not unfair or unlawful in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed