Nuclear Energy in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Easynet Global Services Ltd v the Companies (Cross-Border Mergers) Regulations 2007
    • Chancery Division
    • 31 Octubre 2016

    In my judgment this proposed transaction is not the kind of transaction which the Regulations and the Directive were enacted to facilitate. The Regulations as a whole and Reg 2 in particular have to be interpreted having regard to the purpose for which the Regulations was enacted. 2 when it is properly interpreted and does not fall in the jurisdiction of the court. While it can be said to be a merger, it is not, in reality, a cross-border merger at all.

  • R an Taisce (The National Trust for Ireland) v The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change NNB Generation Company Ltd, The Minister for Environment, Community and Local Government, Ireland and Another (Interested Parties)
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 20 Diciembre 2013

    The claimant submits that the decision maker cannot have regard to the future role of the regulatory regime. The defendant submits that it would be odd if that was indeed the case. There is nothing in the Directive or Article 7 to require regulatory standards to be disregarded. Further, regulation by ONR penetrates the entire design so that it is inseparable from the scheme being advanced. As a result ONR is an integral part of the proposal and a key characteristic of the development itself.

    In my judgment there is no reason that precludes the Secretary of State from being able to have regard to, and rely upon, the existence of a stringently operated regulatory regime for future control. Because of its existence, he was satisfied, on a reasonable basis, that he had sufficient information to enable him to come to a final decision on the development consent application.

  • British Energy Power and Trading Ltd and Others v Credit Suisse and Others
    • Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 19 Junio 2007

    This is not, in my judgment, simply a powerful case; it is really unanswerable and fully accords with commercial reality and sense. British Energy would have no commercial interest in restricting assignment by Barclays, or transfer of rights held by Barclays, but not, or not also, by the Banks. Clause 31 of the Share Option Agreement is plainly intended to provide protection for British Energy by restricting rights to dispose of the power-station and the rights granted by the Options.

    That is, as was discussed in the course of submissions, to secure and restrict a first-class mechanic as distinct from securing and restricting anyone with a real commercial involvement. In my judgment, the submission really seems to demonstrate the improbability of parties such as these making such an agreement. Moreover there were restrictions on a change of Agent and Security Trustee provided for in the Restated Credit Agreement (clause 19.15) and the Intercreditor Deed (clause 12.11).

  • Energysolutions Eu Ltd v Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 15 Diciembre 2015

    Conversely, however, part at least of Buxton LJ's dictum as to the status of the claim under the Regulations does seem to me to form part of the essential reasoning leading to the decision. The Regulations provide for a cause of action for breaches of the provisions of parts 1–8 of the Regulations, which must be regarded in these courts as an action for breach of statutory duty.

  • Phoenix General Insurance Company of Greece S.A. v Halvanon Insurance Company Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 09 Octubre 1986

    The statutory prohibitions are designed to protect the insured by seeking to ensure that undesirable persons are not authorised to carry on insurance business and that authorised insurers remain solvent. Good public policy and common sense therefore require that contracts of insurance, even if made by unauthorised insurers, should not be invalidated.

See all results
Legislation
  • Nuclear Installations Act 1965
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1965
    ......prescribed, being an installation designed or adapted. for— . (i) the production or use of atomic energy; or. . . (ii) the carrying out of any process which is. preparatory or ancillary to the production or use. of atomic energy and which involves or ......
  • The Energy Act 2004 (Nuclear Decommissioning) (Exempt Activities and Further Conditions) Regulations 2005
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 2005
  • Energy Act 1983
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1983
    ...... persons other than Electricity Boards, and for certain other purposes; and to amend the law relating to the duties of persons responsible for nuclear installations and to compensation for breach of those duties. . [9th May 1983] . . Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and ......
  • Science and Technology Act 1965
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1965
    ...... (2) The activities of the National Institute for Research in. Nuclear Science shall be taken over by the Science Research. Council. . (3) The ... S-4 . Extension of research functions of Atomic Energy Authority. 4 Extension of research functions of Atomic Energy Authority. ......
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT