Environmental Impact in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • R v North Yorkshire County Council, ex parte Brown and Another
    • House of Lords
    • 11 Febrero 1999

    Section 22 and Schedule 2 of the Planning and Compensation Act 1991 gave the North Yorkshire County Council, as "mineral planning authority", power to impose conditions upon the operation of the quarry. The Council consulted widely and advertised its intention to determine the conditions. Many people sent written representations. But the Council did not undertake an environmental impact assessment in accordance with the European Union Council Directive of 27 June 1985 (85/337/EEC).

    The position would be different if, upon a proper construction of the United Kingdom legislation, the determination of conditions was merely a subsidiary part of a single planning process in which the main decision likely to affect the environment had already been taken. In such a case, the environmental impact assessment (if any) would have been made at the earlier stage and no further assessment would be required.

    The principle in this and similar cases seems to me to be clear: the Directive does not apply to decisions which involve merely the detailed regulation of activities for which the principal consent, raising the substantial environmental issues, has already been given. But the procedure was nevertheless a new and freestanding examination of the issues and could therefore, in my opinion, require the information provided by an environmental impact assessment.

  • R (Jones) v Mansfield District Council
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 16 Octubre 2003

    As the judge said, the uncertainties may or may not make it impossible reasonably to conclude that there is no likelihood of significant environmental effect. It is possible in principle to have sufficient information to enable a decision reasonably to be made as to the likelihood of significant environmental effects even if certain details are not known and further surveys are to be undertaken.

  • R James Kenyon v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 18 Diciembre 2018

    The Defendant's written statement summarised the Defendant's assessment and conclusions, expressly referring to air quality, traffic, and cumulative impact. He concluded, in the final paragraph, that there would be an impact from an increase in traffic in the locality. He took into account, as he was entitled to do, that the Site was not in a designated area nor was it an AQMA. He concluded that the impact from the increase in traffic would not have significant environmental effects.

  • Friends of the Earth Ltd and Another v North Yorkshire County Council Third Energy Uk Gas Ltd (Interested Party)
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 20 Diciembre 2016

    The application for planning permission did not include any development at Knapton. Paragraph 122 of the National Planning Policy Framework ("NPPF") advises planning authorities that they should focus on whether the development is an acceptable use of land, rather than on control of processes or emissions where these are subject to approval under pollution control regimes, and it should be assumed that those regimes will operate effectively.

  • R Lebus and Others v South Cambridgeshire District Council
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 27 Agosto 2002

    It is not appropriate for a person charged with making a screening opinion to start from the premise that although there may be significant impacts, these can be reduced to insignificance as a result of the implementation of conditions of various kinds. The appropriate course in such a case is to require an environmental statement setting out the significant impacts and the measures which it is said will reduce their significance.

See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results