Finch, R. (on the application of) v Surrey County Council [2020] EWHC 3566 (Admin) (21 December 2020)

Finch, R. (on the application of) v Surrey County Council [2020] EWHC 3566 (Admin) (21 December 2020)

The court held that the EIA Regulations and Directive, properly interpreted, did not require the assessment of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the eventual combustion of oil produced at the site as an indirect effect of the development. The obligation to assess indirect effects is limited to those which are effects of the development for which consent is sought. The downstream use of oil, after it leaves the site and enters the market, is too remote and not an effect of the development itself. Surrey County Council acted lawfully in excluding such emissions from the EIA and in relying on national policy and guidance. The challenge was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3566 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Sarah Finch; Defendant: Surrey County Council; 1st Interested Party: Horse Hill Developments Limited; 2nd Interested Party: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Intervenor: Friends of the Earth Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Environmental Impact Assessment, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Climate Change, Planning Permission, Judicial Review, EU Law, National Planning Policy Framework
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law Environmental Impact Assessment Greenhouse Gas Emissions Climate Change Planning Permission Judicial Review +2 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarah Finch

Claimant

Surrey County Council

Defendant

Horse Hill Developments Limited

1st Interested Party

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

2nd Interested Party

Friends of the Earth Limited

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Horse Hill oil development was required to assess greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the eventual combustion of oil produced at the site as an indirect effect under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 and Directive 2011/92/EU.
  2. 2 Whether Surrey County Council erred in law by excluding downstream greenhouse gas emissions from the EIA and by relying on national policy and guidance to do so.
  3. 3 Whether national planning policy (NPPF paragraph 183 and Minerals PPG) is unlawful for permitting the exclusion of downstream emissions from EIA assessment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the EIA Regulations and Directive, properly interpreted, did not require the assessment of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the eventual combustion of oil produced at the site as an indirect effect of the development. The obligation to assess indirect effects is limited to those which are effects of the development for which consent is sought. The downstream use of oil, after it leaves the site and enters the market, is too remote and not an effect of the development itself. Surrey County Council acted lawfully in excluding such emissions from the EIA and in relying on national policy and guidance. The challenge was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed