We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

Environmental impact

Brown v Carlisle City Council

Court of Appeal

Published June 23, 2010

Brown v Carlisle City Council

Before Lord Justice Jacob, Lord Justice Sullivan and Sir Mark Waller

Judgment May 19, 2010A planning committee had to look at the environmental impact of required works which were not part of the planning permission if they were part of the cumulative effect of the development that was sought.

Advertisement

The Court of Appeal so stated when allowing the appeal of Thomas Brown against the dismissal by Mr Justice Owen ([2009] EWHC 2519 (Admin)) of his renewed application to apply for judicial review of a grant of planning permission by Carlisle City Council for a freight storage and distribution facility at Carlisle Lake District Airport by Stobart Air Ltd.

A planning obligation connected with the planning permission required Stobart to take action in connection with future works, which were not included in the planning application, to repair and renew the runway, and complete a passenger terminal building. The claimant contended that the council had failed to consider whether the works might have environmental impacts in combination with the freight and distribution facility.

Mr Gregory Jones and Mr Jeremy Pike for Mr Brown; Mr Timothy Mould, QC and Mr James Pereira for Carlisle; Mr Peter Village, QC and Mr James Strachan for Stobart, as interested party.

LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN said that under regulation 3(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations (SI 1999 No 293) the council was required to take environmental information into account including a statement as to the cumulative effect of the development on the environment.

The answer to the question what were the cumulative effects of a particular development was a question of fact. The works envisaged by the planning obligation agreement were part of the cumulative effects of the development permission given by the planning permission.

Advertisement

Lord Justice Jacob and Sir Mark Waller agreed.

Solicitors: Dickinson Dees LLP, Newcastle upon Tyne; Mr Mark Lambert, Carlisle; Macfarlanes LLP.