David Edwards and Lilian Pallikaropoulos v Environment Agency, First Secretary of State, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Cemex UK Cement Ltd (formerly Rugby Ltd)
Language: English Publication details: 2006Subject(s):- EDWARDS AND ANOTHER V ENVIRONMENT AGENCY AND OTHERS AND CEMEX UK CEMENT LTD
- POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL (ENGLAND AND WALES) REGULATIONS 2000 REG 10
- DIRECTIVE 85/337/EEC
- R V ENVIRONMENT AGENCY EX P GIBSON
- R V DURHAM CC EX P LOWTHER
- R V SOS HEALTH EX P UNITED STATES TOBACCO INTERNATIONAL INC
- INTERBREW SA V COMPETITION COMMISSION
- England and Wales -- 1543-
- ENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT-ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT-ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 134309-2001 |
[2006] EWCA Civ 877, 27 June 2006. Concerns the requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) relating to a proposal to burn waste tyres as a partial substitute fuel at a cement manufacturing plant. Appeal by ED against the decision ([2005] EWHC 657 (Admin), unreported) not to quash a conditional permit granted by EN to C pursuant to the Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000 Reg 10 for the continued operation of C's Rugby cement plant including the proposed burning of waste tyres as fuel. E contended that the permit was unlawful for want of an EIA report following Directive 85/337/EEC and that C's application did not comply with the 2000 Regulations because of a shortfall of information on the predicted emissions and their environmental impact. "Held": appeal dismissed. EN did not need to consider an EIA. EA had, regarding its granting of a conditional permit following the 2000 Regulations, been in breach of its common law duty of fairness by failing to disclose consultation internal reports material to its decision. However there was no point in quashing the decision to enable consultation to take place on out-of-date data.