Scott Loveluck & Anor v Natural England

Scott Loveluck & Anor v Natural England

None of the grounds advanced by the applicant are arguable; the process was fair, ECHR compliant, and within the statutory framework. The Board acted within its expertise and powers, and the claim was not brought promptly or within time. Permission to apply for judicial review and extension of time are refused.

Parties
Claimant: Scott Loveluck; Claimant: Senedh an Stenegow A’Penwydh; Defendant: Natural England
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Renewal of Application for Permission and Extension of Time
Outcome
Permission to apply for judicial review and extension of time refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Site of Special Scientific Interest (sssi), Procedural Fairness, Bias, European Convention on Human Rights (echr), Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Environmental Law Human Rights Judicial Review Site of Special Scientific Interest (sssi) Procedural Fairness Bias European Convention on Human Rights (echr) +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scott Loveluck

Claimant

Senedh an Stenegow A’Penwydh

Claimant

Natural England

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Renewal of Application for Permission and Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's confirmation of SSSI notification was unlawful due to maladministration, bias, breaches of ECHR, irrationality, reliance on matters without evidence, and errors of fact and law
  2. 2 Whether the process was procedurally fair and compliant with statutory and ECHR requirements
  3. 3 Whether the claim was brought within the required time limits

Ratio Decidendi

None of the grounds advanced by the applicant are arguable; the process was fair, ECHR compliant, and within the statutory framework. The Board acted within its expertise and powers, and the claim was not brought promptly or within time. Permission to apply for judicial review and extension of time are refused.

Court Disposition

Permission to apply for judicial review and extension of time refused

Orders

  • Parties to agree a draft order and file within 14 days of hand down
  • Written submissions on consequential matters to be filed if not agreed