||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 26 (Jan)
|| EWHC 2954 (Admin)
||Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court
||Gregory Jones and James Neill (instructed by Parkinson Wright) for the claimant.
||John Howell QC and Jane Collier (instructed by Browne Jacobson LLP) for the defendant.
||Christopher Balogh (instructed by Jane Reynolds) for the interested party.
||5 December 2008
Protection of environment - Protection of habitat - Site of special scientific interest - Exposed land containing fossils - Wild birds - Claimants constructing 'sacrificial sea defence' in site of special scientific interest - Defence requiring maintenance - Defendant refusing to consent to maintenance - Meaning of 'conservation' - Whether defendant's notification a 'plan' or 'project' requiring environmental assessment - Whether refusal to maintain sea defence ultra vires - EEC Directive 92/43.
Protection of environment Protection of habitat. Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court: Conservation was a dynamic concept that might involve keeping things as they were, but might also involve allowing natural processes to take their course. In the instant case the claim for judicial review was allowed as the defendant had failed to undertake an appropriate assessment of the identified site of special scientific interest and the implications for the special protection area in issue.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports