Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, R (On the Application Of) v Natural England

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, R (On the Application Of) v Natural England

The court held that Natural England lawfully granted the licence for a scientific trial under section 16(1)(a) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, properly considered the absence of other satisfactory solutions, imposed adequate and proportionate conditions, and conducted an appropriate assessment under the Habitats Regulations. The claimants failed to show any breach of statutory or Directive requirements or irrationality in the decision-making process.

Parties
Claimant: Royal Society for the Protection of Birds; Claimant: Mark Avery; Defendant: Natural England; Interested Party: Jemima Parry-Jones; Interested Party: Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Wildlife Conservation, Judicial Review, Licensing, Habitats Directive, Birds Directive
Environmental Law Administrative Law EU Law Wildlife Conservation Judicial Review Licensing Habitats Directive Birds Directive

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

Claimant

Mark Avery

Claimant

Natural England

Defendant

Jemima Parry-Jones

Interested Party

Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the grant of a licence for a brood management trial of hen harriers by Natural England was lawful under section 16 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and relevant EU Directives.
  2. 2 Whether Natural England properly considered alternative solutions and proportionality under the Birds Directive and Habitats Regulations.
  3. 3 Whether the licence conditions and assessment met statutory requirements for protection of Special Protection Areas (SPAs).

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Natural England lawfully granted the licence for a scientific trial under section 16(1)(a) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, properly considered the absence of other satisfactory solutions, imposed adequate and proportionate conditions, and conducted an appropriate assessment under the Habitats Regulations. The claimants failed to show any breach of statutory or Directive requirements or irrationality in the decision-making process.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed