R v Inspectorate of Pollution, ex parte Greenpeace Ltd (No. 2)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtQueen's Bench Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
30 cases
6 books & journal articles
  • The Usual Suspects? Public Participation Under the Aarhus Convention
    • United Kingdom
    • The Modern Law Review Nbr. 66-1, January 2003
    • 1 Enero 2003
    ...certain decisions by third parties, this is a review rather than an appellate process.142 See RvHMIP ex parte Greenpeace Ltd. (No. 2) [1994] 4 All ER 329 and RvSecretary of Statefor Foreign Affairs ex parte World Development Movement [1995] 1 WLR 385.143 See, for example, the contrasting ap......
  • A Changing Role for the Administrative Law of Taxation
    • United Kingdom
    • Social & Legal Studies Nbr. 24-2, June 2015
    • 1 Junio 2015
    ...v. Attorney General [1869] LR 4 HL 100.Pepper v. Hart [1993] AC 593.R v. Inspectorate of Pollution ex parte Greenpeace (no.2) [1994] 4 All ER 329 HC (‘Greenpeace’).R v. IRC ex parte MFK Underwriting Agents [1990] 1 All ER 91 CA (‘MFK’).R v. IRC ex parte National Federation of Self Employed ......
  • Resources, Rights, and Environmental Regulation
    • United Kingdom
    • Journal of Law and Society Nbr. 32-1, March 2005
    • 1 Marzo 2005
    ...the HumanRights Act 1998 to Public Authorities and Private Bodies' (1999) 58 Camb. Law J.159.66 Rv. HMIP ex parte Greenpeace (No. 2) [1994] 4 All E.R. 329; Rv. ForeignSecretary ex p. World Development Movement Ltd [1995] 1 W.L.R. 386.67 Rv. Somerset CC ex p. Dixon [1997] J.P.L. 1030.68 Art.......
  • Wrongfooting the Lord Chancellor: Access to Justice in the High Court
    • United Kingdom
    • The Modern Law Review Nbr. 61-2, March 1998
    • 1 Marzo 1998
    ...State for Foreign Affairs, ex parte WorldDevelopment Movement [1995] 1 All ER 611; and RvInspectorate of Pollution, ex parte Greenpeace[1994] 4 All ER 329.46 Otton J’s decision in ex parte Greenpeace not to order costs against the unsuccessful applicants wasthe exception to the rule.47 Civi......
  • Request a trial to view additional 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