U & Partners(East Anglia) Ltd, R (on the application of) v The Broads Authority [2011] EWHC 1824 (Admin) (13 July 2011)

U & Partners(East Anglia) Ltd, R (on the application of) v The Broads Authority [2011] EWHC 1824 (Admin) (13 July 2011)

The planning authority's decision to grant permission without requiring an EIA was unlawful because it failed to consider significant environmental effects, including the increased risk of flooding to the claimant's land, and wrongly excluded these as planning considerations. The claim was not barred by delay because the three-month period under CPR 54.5, as interpreted in light of EU law, must be certain and not subject to judicial discretion on promptness.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1824 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: R(U & Partners(East Anglia) Ltd); Defendant: The Broads Authority; Interested Party: The Environment Agency
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Permission and Merits
Outcome
Claim allowed; planning permission quashed.
Legal Topics
Environmental Impact Assessment, Planning Permission, Judicial Review, EU Directives, Promptness in Judicial Review, Flood Defence Works
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law European Union Law Environmental Impact Assessment Planning Permission Judicial Review EU Directives +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R(U & Partners(East Anglia) Ltd)

Claimant

The Broads Authority

Defendant

The Environment Agency

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Permission and Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the grant of planning permission was unlawful due to failure to require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999 and Directive 85/337/EEC
  2. 2 Whether the planning authority erred in treating the risk of flooding to the claimant's land as not a planning consideration
  3. 3 Whether the alternative scheme proposed by the claimant should have been considered

Ratio Decidendi

The planning authority's decision to grant permission without requiring an EIA was unlawful because it failed to consider significant environmental effects, including the increased risk of flooding to the claimant's land, and wrongly excluded these as planning considerations. The claim was not barred by delay because the three-month period under CPR 54.5, as interpreted in light of EU law, must be certain and not subject to judicial discretion on promptness.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; planning permission quashed.

Orders

  • Planning permission granted on 28 July 2010 is quashed.
  • Permission for judicial review is granted.