‘A landowner can be said to have “knowingly permitted” waste activities as soon as it becomes aware that controlled waste has been deposited on its land, the Court of Appeal has held. ‘
OUT-LAW.com, 14th February 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘One of the proposals in the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill is that a challenge to an unlawful decision should fail if it is highly likely that the outcome for the applicant would not have been substantially different, had the public authority not acted unlawfully. This compares with the current test which is that the decision should be quashed unless it is inevitable that the decision would be the same.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 16th February 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Regina v Walker & Son (Hauliers) Ltd [2014] EWCA Crim 100; [2014] WLR (D) 49
‘If a defendant knew that waste operations were occurring on his land, ignorance of the fact that such operations were being carried out in breach of the requirement for an environmental permit was no defence to a charge of knowingly permitting the operation of a regulated facility without an environmental permit.’
WLR Daily, 6th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Powers to control or eradicate invasive plants and animal species – such as Japanese knotweed or parakeets – should be given to government departments and environment protection authorities, the Law Commission has recommended.’
The Guardian, 11th February 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘We have published a report, making recommendations on the control of invasive non-native species as part of our project on wildlife.’
Law Commission, 11th February 2014
‘At first sight, proposals full of sound and fury, and signifying not a great deal for planning and environmental challenges. There are some slippery costs changes which we need to look at, but some of the potentially more concerning proposals do not fully apply to this area, as I shall explain. There are also some perfectly sensible proposals about harmonising planning challenges which lawyers have been advocating for years.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th February 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Earlier this week, the UK Supreme Court gave judgment in R (HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport [2014] UKSC 3. A good overview of the issues at stake in the case can be found in the Court’s press summary, as well as in a post by David Hart on the UK Human Rights Blog. This post is concerned only with one aspect of the decision, and with some very interesting dicta concerning not only the relationship between UK and EU law, but the nature of the UK’s constitutional order itself.’
UK Constitutional Law Group, 23rd January 2014
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The Supreme Court has rejected a legal bid by objectors of the HS2 national high-speed rail link to force further scrutiny of the government’s plans.’
BBC News, 22nd January 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has clarified the operation of a key part of the National Planning Policy Framework in situations where a local authority has yet to produce a local plan.’
Local Government Lawyer, 13th December 2013
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘This is the last gasp in the saga on whether Mrs Pallikaropoulos should bear £25,000 of the costs of her unsuccessful 2008 appeal to the House of Lords. And the answer, after intervening trips to the Supreme Court in 2010 and to the CJEU in 2013, is a finding by the Supreme Court that she should bear those costs.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 11th December 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Supreme Court, 11th December 2013
“Builders will be able to bypass councils and appeal directly to ministers to push through controversial housing schemes, ministers have said. Currently, major developments are usually decided by votes in a committee of councillors. However under new powers ministers can step in if the local authorities repeatedly drag their feet over decisions.”
Daily Telegraph, 13th November 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A High Court judge yesterday granted permission to an application by Westminster City Council and English Heritage for a judicial review of the decision by the Secretary of State (SoS) not to call in proposals for a £800 million redevelopment of Elizabeth House near London’s Waterloo Station.”
OUT-LAW.com, 8th November 2013
Source: www.OUT-LAW.com
“One of proposals in the Ministry of Justice’s paper on Judicial Review: Proposals for Further Reform is the creation of a new specialist planning chamber as part of the Upper Tribunal. While planning tends to be thought of as a niche area of public law (and a technically dense one at that) the way in which the paper frames discussion should give public lawyers pause for thought. This is particularly when planning judicial reviews have often been cited by government representatives as examples of why reform is needed to judicial review. The Further Reforms paper is no exception – the only two ‘case studies’ (albeit no case names) given in the paper are of judicial review of planning decisions (p 5 and 6).”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 1st November 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“The current storms brought down a turbine in Teignmouth: see here for good pics of this and other mayhem. And the rule of law recently brought down a massive wind farm proposed for Shetland. The Scottish Ministers had waved aside a request for a public inquiry, and ended up drafting reasons which ignored the obligations in the Wild Birds Directive in respect of this bird – the whimbrel. Lady Clark quashed the consent on this ground, and also decided that the wind farmer could not apply for the consent anyway because it had not got the requisite licence which she concluded was a pre-condition for such an application. ”
UK Human Rights Blog, 28th October 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“The High Court recently offered a useful starter pack in both planning and administrative law.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 28th October 2013
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“The Law Commission has today [15 October] set out its proposed principles for a new regulatory regime for wildlife.”
Law Commission, 15th October 2013
Source: www.lawcommission.justice.gov.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024