Northern Ireland judgment

Northern Ireland judgment

The Welsh Ministers lawfully adopted the Plan after a process that properly identified, described, and evaluated all reasonable alternatives capable of meeting the objectives, as required by the SEA Directive and the 2004 Regulations. The Minister did not breach the section 28G duty, having taken reasonable steps to mitigate harm to SSSIs. The decisions were rational, lawful, and adequately reasoned.

Parties
Claimant: Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland Limited; Defendant: Welsh Ministers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Application refused; permission granted for Grounds 1 and 2, but substantive claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, Transport Planning, Judicial Review, Duty to Consider Reasonable Alternatives, Duty to Conserve and Enhance Sssis

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland Limited

Claimant

Welsh Ministers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing

  1. 1 Whether the Welsh Ministers' adoption of the M4 Corridor Around Newport Plan complied with the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive and the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes (Wales) Regulations 2004
  2. 2 Whether the Welsh Ministers breached their duty under section 28G of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to further the conservation and enhancement of SSSIs

Ratio Decidendi

The Welsh Ministers lawfully adopted the Plan after a process that properly identified, described, and evaluated all reasonable alternatives capable of meeting the objectives, as required by the SEA Directive and the 2004 Regulations. The Minister did not breach the section 28G duty, having taken reasonable steps to mitigate harm to SSSIs. The decisions were rational, lawful, and adequately reasoned.

Court Disposition

Application refused; permission granted for Grounds 1 and 2, but substantive claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission to proceed refused for Ground 3.
  • Permission to proceed granted for Grounds 1 and 2.