Source: http://www.swarb.co.uk/lisc/Envir19991999.php
Timestamp: 2013-05-22 01:04:09
Document Index: 432659756

Matched Legal Cases: ['UKHL ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'Art 226', 'UKHL ']

Environment - 1999 Environmental Law. See also Planning Law, and Nuisance.
Regina -v- St Edmondsbury Borough Council ex parte Walton [1999] JPL 805
1999AdmnHooper J
Planning, Environment, Local Government
The decision as to whether there should be an environmental statement was an important one, and that if an authority wished to delegate the decision to an officer, it had to do so formally and could not rely on some general practice alone.
Mott & An -v- Environment Agency 25 Jan 1999CA
A bylaw allowing the placing of fixed engines for the purposes of fishing for eels was not made in excess of the statutory power of the authority, and the Agency was liable in damages for having unlawfully seized the applicants' eel fishing equipment.
Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975 Regina -v- Northumbrian Water Limited, Ex Parte Newcastle and North Tyneside Health Authority [1998] All ER (D) 733
3 Feb 1999QBD
A water company's duty as regards fluoridation of water supplies, is to have regard to the interests of its shareholders, not the general public good. Having considered this with the Health authority, it had the choice as a private company to choose.
Water Industry Act 1991 87 Regina -v- North Yorkshire County Council, ex parte Brown and Another [1999] UKHL 7; [1999] 2 WLR 452; [2000] 1 AC 397; [1999] 1 PLR 116; [1999] 1 All ER 969
12 Feb 1999HLLord Hoffmann
When a mineral planning authority set conditions on the continued operation of a quarry which had been operating since pre-1947, that decision was a development consent, and it required to be supported by an environmental impact assessment, since it had significant environmental effects. The purpose of the Directive is "to ensure that planning permissions which may affect the environment are made on the basis of full information."
Planning and Compensation Act 1991 - Council Directive 85/337/EEC Link[s] omitted Regina -v- Durham County Council Sherburn Stone Company Limited Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions ex parte Rodney Huddleston [1999] EWCA Civ 792
15 Feb 1999CA
Link[s] omitted European Parliament -v- Council of the European Union C-164/97
European, Agriculture, Environment
Europa Regulations on the protection of forests against atmospheric pollution and fire - Legal basis - Article 43 of the EC Treaty - Article 130s of the EC Treaty - Parliament's prerogatives.
Europa "It is clear from the provisions of the amended regulations that the aims of the Community schemes for the protection of forests are partly agricultural since they are intended in particular to contribute to safeguarding the productive potential of agriculture, and partly of a specifically environmental nature, since their primary objective is to maintain and monitor forest ecosystems.In such circumstances it is necessary, in order to determine the appropriate legal basis, to consider whether the measures in question relate principally to a particular field of action, having only incidental effects on other policies, or whether both aspects are equally essential. If the first hypothesis is correct, recourse to a single legal basis is sufficient �; if the second is correct, it is insufficient � and the institution is required to adopt the measure on the basis of both the provisions from which its competence derives � . However, no such dual basis is possible where the procedures laid down for each legal basis are incompatible with each other � .With more particular reference to the common agricultural policy and the Community environmental policy, there is nothing in the case-law to indicate that, in principle, one should take preference over the other. It makes clear that a Community measure cannot be part of Community action on environmental matters merely because it takes account of requirements of protection referred to in Article 130r(2) of the EC Treaty � . Articles 130r and 130s leave intact the powers held by the Community under other provisions of the Treaty and provide a legal basis only for specific action on environmental matters � . In contrast, Article 130s of the Treaty must be the basis for provisions which fall specifically within the environmental policy �, even if they have an impact on the functioning of the internal market � or if their objective is the improvement of agricultural production �
Link[s] omitted Gray & An -v- Braer Corporation et Al 10 Mar 1999OHCS
The Act limited claims generally to three years after any damage arose with a back-stop maximum of six years after which no claim at all could be begun. Section is a prescriptive provision not by way of a limitation period as such.
Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971 9 Regina -v- Milford Haven Port Authority 10 Mar 1999Crwn
A four million pound fine for a major pollution event was proper to reflect the genuine and justified public concern which had been caused. If damage flowed directly from the conduct of a business, the business was as liable as those directly responsible.
Water Resources Act 1991 85(1) P & O Scottish Ferries Ltd -v- The Braer Corporation 10 Mar 1999OHCS
The Act excluded wider claims than those prescribed within it. Economic losses arising for a ferry company losing out because of adverse publicity were not to be claimed. The Act is clear and there is no need to refer back to the Convention on which it was based.
Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971 1 - International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage Commission -v- France (Judgment) C-166/97; [1999] ECR I-1719
18 Mar 1999ECJ
Europa A Member State may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in its internal legal system in order to justify a failure to comply with the obligations and time-limits laid down in a directive. In an action under Article 169 of the Treaty, the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation prevailing at the end of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion. Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds requires the Member States to provide the special protection areas referred to therein with a legal protection regime that is capable, in particular, of ensuring both the survival and reproduction of the bird species listed in Annex I to the directive and the breeding, moulting and wintering of migratory species which are regular visitors, albeit not listed in that annex. A protection regime under which - for want of any specific substantive measures, except in relation to hunting - the only status enjoyed by a special protection area is that of State-owned land and of a maritime game reserve is incapable of providing adequate protection for the purposes of those provisions. 4 Under Article 4(4) of Directive 79/409 on the conservation of wild birds, Member States are required to take appropriate steps to avoid pollution and deterioration of the habitats of the species concerned, even in relation to an area which has not been classified as a special protection area provided that, under the directive, it should have been so classified. It follows that any infringement of that provision presupposes that the area in question is one of the most suitable territories in number and size for the conservation of protected species, within the meaning of the fourth subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the directive which lays down the criteria for such classification. In this connection, the mere fact that a site has been included by a Member State in an inventory of important areas for bird conservation does not prove that it ought to have been classified as a special protection area.
Link[s] omitted Regina -v- Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Bray [1999] EWHC Admin 252
13 Apr 1999QBD
A bylaw, restricting fishing by reference to the size of the ship, was valid. The words must not be construed out of context of the whole Act, and in this case an 'instrument' used for fishing did not include the vessel itself.
Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1966 Link[s] omitted Falmouth and Truro Health Authority -v- South West Water Services [1999] EWHC Admin 349
23 Apr 1999Admn
A watercourse for the purpose of the Act was only a limited area of water and could not include a river or an estuary. An authority serving an abatement notice in respect of sewerage discharges, was not under a duty to consult first with the water company, but should do so if it had raised an expectation of consultation.
Environmental Protection Act 1990 80 259 Link[s] omitted Leeds City Council -v- Spencer [1999] EWCA Civ 1351
6 May 1999CA
Local Government, Animals, Environment
The defendant appealed against an order refusing to set aside an enforcement notice served by the council for his failure to destroy rats and mice on his land.
Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949 - Environmental Protection Act 1990 Link[s] omitted Landcatch Limited -v- The Braer Corporation and Trevor Williams and Anthony Jones and Michael S Hudner and Assurance foreningen Skuld and the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund [1999] ScotCS 117; [1999] 2 Lloyd's LR 316
Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971 5(3) Link[s] omitted Assurenceforeningen Skuld -v- International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund & An 14 Jun 1999OHCS
Where a compensation fund had been created with a last date for compensation claims to be made fixed, the Act was silent about how late claims were to be dealt with. There is no rule to say that applications for an extension of time must be made in advance, and the court felt it must be possible to apply.
Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971 5(3) Regina -v- Bedfordshire County Council FD O'Dell & Sons Limited ex parte Mason and Ors (As Representatives of the Langford Action Group) [1999] EWHC Admin 676
13 Jul 1999Admn
Link[s] omitted Regina -v- Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council and Pugmanor Properties Ltd ex parte Foster [1999] EWHC Admin 774
30 Jul 1999Admn
Environment Act 1995 95 Link[s] omitted Savage and Another -v- Fairclough and others [1999] EWCA Civ 2056; [1999] EWCA Civ 2056
30 Jul 1999CALord Justice Auld Lord Justice Mummery Mr Justice Gage
The defendants had applied inorganic fertiliser to their land, eventually causing pollution of the claimant's water supply. The pollution exceeded EC levels. However the claimants had not established that the damage was foreseeable, nor that the practice of the defendant farmers was other than standard practice. Held: The claimant's appeal failed. They had not established forseeability as required in Cambridge Water.
EC Directive 80/778/EEC Link[s] omitted London Borough of Hillingdon -v- Secretary of State for Environment;�Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust; Clinical Energy Limited; Environmental Incineration Company Limited and Bfh Incineration Limited [1999] EWHC Admin 772
Link[s] omitted Official Receiver -v- Environment Agency 5 Aug 1999CA
Environment, Insolvency
A waste management licence could constitute both property and onerous property for the purposes of the Insolvency Act. It could also be an interest incidental to the land to which it related. Because of this the liquidator of a waste management company could disclaim the licence without committing an offence under the Act.
Environmental Protection Act 1990 33 34 - Insolvency Act 1986 178(3), 436 In Re Rhondda Waste Disposal Company Ltd (In Administration) 13 Aug 1999ChD
Where a company had gone into administration, it was not correct for a criminal prosecution under the Act to proceed without first getting the consent of the court or of the company's administrator. Such proceedings constituted 'other proceedings' under the Insolvency Act. The divisional court was not bound by decisions of the Court of Session where the decision was not on all fours with the instant case.
Environmental Protection Act 1990 - Insolvency Act 1986 10 11 World Wildlife Fund and Others -v- Autonome Provinz Bozen and Others [2001] 1 CMLR 149; C-435/97; [1999] EUECJ C-435/97
12 Oct 1999ECJ
Environment, European
The court considered a project for converting Bolzano airport in Italy from military to civilian use. The national law did not require the project to be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The court asked whether the national law conformed to the Directive. The questions for the court included whether Article 4(2) of the Directive could be interpreted as meaning that certain classes of the projects listed in Annex II may from the outset, in the absolute discretion of the Member States, be excluded in their entirety from the obligation to carry out an EIA, or whether the margin of discretion enjoyed by Member States is limited by the obligation in Article 2(1) to subject those projects likely in any event to have significant effects on the environment to an EIA. Although member states had been given some discretion as to the circumstances in which environmental impact assessments would be required, that discretion did not extend to excluding entire classes of projects from the requirements, where it was reasonable to expect that individual projects would have significant environmental impact. The criteria or thresholds mentioned in Article 4(2) of the Directive are designed to facilitate examination of the actual characteristics of any given project in order to determine whether it is subject to the requirement to carry out an assessment. No project likely to have significant effects on the environment should be exempt from assessment unless the specific project excluded could, on the basis of a comprehensive assessment, be regarded as not being likely to have such effects. All the elements of the project relevant to the environmental impact assessment must also be laid down in detail if a legislative Act is to be relied on to grant consent.
Council Directive 85/337/EEC Link[s] omitted X -v- A and Others 13 Oct 1999ChD
Trusts, Wills and Probate, Environment
A trustee under a will where there was a life interest had the ability to assert a lien over the estate in respect of potential liability which might be incurred because of the necessity of complying with any order for the clean-up of land forming part of the estate, even though the part of the Act which might operate was not yet in force.
Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part II The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust Ltd for Judicial Review of A Decision of the Secretary of State To Grant Licences To Shhot Barnacle Geese [1999] ScotCS 239
EC Birds Directive 79/409/EEC Link[s] omitted A M L Van Rouge -v- Dagelijks Bestuur Van Het Waterschap De Dommel (Gebr Van Aarle Bv, Third Party) C-231/97; [1999] EUECJ C-231/97
15 Oct 1999ECJ
The directive relating to the discharge of dangerous substances into aquatic environments, included the precipitation of contaminated steam onto a water course. Pollution is defined as discharge into the water, and discharge as introduction of listed substances into the water. The contaminated steam settled upon the water and contaminated it. Not to prosecute would limit the effectiveness of the Directive.
Council Directive 76/464/EEC On pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment. Link[s] omitted Commission of the European Communities -v- Ireland C-392/96
19 Oct 1999ECJ
The Directive gave member states some discretion as to setting criteria to be fulfilled before a project could be said to have a substantial effect and so require an environmental assessment before being allowed to proceed. Nevertheless, it was not open to members to use a simple size measurement as such a criteria, since this made no allowance for the possible substantial effects of even small projects.
Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. - EC Treaty Art 226 Regina -v- Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council Ex Parte Trustees of the Council for the Protection of Rural England CAT 26 October 1999
26 Oct 1999QBDRichards J
Environment, Planning, European
The authority gave permission for a new shopping centre up to 600,000 sq ft as an urban project. The Trustees sought that the permission be set aside since the council had not undertaken an environmental impact assessment, and under the EC Treaty they had the right to make such a request. It was held that an individual could not seek to enforce a directive once it had been properly enshrined in a member state's law. "�I accept that in exercising discretion with regard to costs � I should seek to give effect to the overriding objective and should have particular regard to the need, so far as practicable, to ensure that the parties are on an equal footing and that the case is dealt with in a way which is proportionate to the financial position of each party. Those aspects of the overriding objective seem to me to be embedded in any event in the principles laid down in ex p CPAG."
Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 (1988 No 1199) British Waterways Board -v- Severn Trent Water Ltd 26 Oct 1999ChD
A water company may have the implied power to discharge surface run-off water from sewers into canals. The powers and duties of water companies and sewerage undertakers were different both under statute and in general. The power to lay a run-off pipe might be held to imply a power to discharge what was run off through it.
Water Industry Act 1991 159 Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Company Ltd -v- Russell [1999] UKHL 49; [1999] 1 WLR 2093; [2000] 1 All ER 97
25 Nov 1999HLLord Steyn Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Millett
Rating, Utilities, Environment
Where an electricity supplier operated a waste plant to generate electricity, but still, the predominant use of the plant was for waste disposal, the rates were not to be calculated under the industry's own special rules, but under those for the general rating of business premises. An explanatory note may be referred to as an aid to construction where the statutory instrument to which it is attached is ambiguous.
Lord Hope considered the meaning of the phrase 'in connection with' and said: "The majority in the Court of Appeal held that it was a sufficient answer to the appellant's argument to construe the words "in connection with" as meaning "having to do with". This explanation of the meaning of the phrase was given by McFarlane J in Re Nanaimo Community Hotel Limited [1944] 4 D.L.R. 638. It was adopted by Somervell L.J. in Johnson v. Johnson [1952] P. 47, 50-51. It may be that in some contexts the substitution of the words "having to do with" will solve the entire problem which is created by the use of the words "in connection with." But I am not, with respect, satisfied that it does so in this case, and Mr. Holgate did not rely on this solution to the difficulty. As he said, the phrase is a protean one which tends to draw its meaning from the words which surround it. In this case it is the surrounding words, when taken together with the words used in the 1991 Amending Order and its wider context, which provide the best guide to a sensible solution of the problem which has been created by the ambiguity."
Electricity Generators (Rateable Values) Order 1989 (1989 No 2474) Link[s] omitted All information on this site is in general and summary form only. The content of any page on this site may be out of date and or incomplete, and you should not not rely directly upon it. Take direct professional legal advice which reflects your own particular situation.