Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2009] All ER (D) 26 (Jan)
Neutral Citation: [2008] EWHC 2954 (Admin)
Court: Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court
Judge:

Blair J

Representation 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.
Judgment Dates: 5 December 2008

Catchwords

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.

The Case

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.

Practice Areas

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