| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2012] All ER (D) 136 (Jun) |
| Neutral Citation: | [2012] EWHC 1643 (QB) |
| Court: | Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court (London) |
| Judge: | Lang J |
| Representation | Peter Village QC and Stephen Whale (instructed by Clyde & Co) for the claimants. |
| Gordon Nardell QC and Christiaan Zwart (instructed by the Regional Solicitor, Environment Agency) for the defendant. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 20 June 2012 |
Catchwords
Environment - Protection - Flood plan - Environment agency classifying sluices on Manchester canal as formal flood defences, and basing flood zone assessment and mapping on assumption that sluices would fail and remain closed - Land adjacent to canal owned by claimants designated as having 'high probability' of flooding - Claimant seeking judicial review of decision - Whether Environment agency failing to properly interpret apply or have regard to own policy PPS 25 when classifying sluices as formal flood defences.
The Case
Environment Protection. The Administrative Court held that the defendant Environment Agency had failed properly to interpret, apply or have regard to its own policy when it classified the sluices on the canal as formal flood defences, and therefore the claimant's application for judicial review was allowed.
Practice Areas
Lexis®Library
- 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
- 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
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
