Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2007] All ER (D) 365 (Dec)
Neutral Citation: [2007] EWCA Civ 1377
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Pill, Sedley and Rimer LJJ

Representation Michael Fordham QC and Maurice Sheridan (instructed by Walker Morris) for the claimant.
  Jon Turner QC and Gerry Facenna (instructed by the Legal Department of the Environment Agency) for the defendant.
  James Maurici (instructed the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) for the interested party.
Judgment Dates: 21 December 2007

Catchwords

Environment - Protection - Pollution control - Permit - Landfill site - Piggybacking method - Separate operation of landfill partially overlaying closed cell containing previously deposited waste - Judge finding piggybacking as applied for by claimant lawful - Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000, - Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002, - Groundwater Regulations () - Council Directive (EC) 1999/31.

The Case

A permit which did not require the ending and preventing of an old discharge did not 'permit' that discharge within the meaning of reg 4 of the Groundwater Regulations (). The regulations contemplated a discharge, direct or in direct, which resulted from the activity to be authorised and its consequences but not a discharge extraneous in the sense that it was unrelated to the new activity.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.