Home > Expertise > Environment > Judicial Review

Judicial Review

Landmark Chambers has long been considered as the leading set in environmental law. We were awarded Environment/Planning Set of the Year at the 2017 Chambers UK Bar Awards. We are ranked in tier 1 in environment by the Legal 500, the latest edition of which states that Landmark is a “market-leading set”. Chambers & Partners 2018 ranks Landmark in its first tier and describes it as “a standout set”, stating that our barristers “are consistently excellent and user-friendly” (2017), and that Landmark “possesses a hugely esteemed team” that are “clearly big players in this field” (2016).

Chambers has been involved in most of the leading judicial review cases on Strategic Environmental Assessment, Environmental Impact Assessment, habitats etc with members regularly appearing in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court for Claimants such as NGOs, charities, campaign groups, defendants including local authorities, central government departments and interested parties including developers. Recent decisions of the Supreme Court related to environmental JR in which our barristers have been involved include:

  • R (CPRE Kent) v Dover District Council [2018] 1 W.L.R. 108 – reasons in Environmental Impact Assessment cases;
  • R (Mott) v Environment Agency [2018] UKSC 10 – lawfulness of conditions related to licenses for salmon fishing;
  • R (on the application of Champion) v North Norfolk DC [2015] 1 W.L.R. 3710 – relevance of mitigation measures to environmental impact assessment;
  • R (Buckinghamshire CC) v Secretary of State for Transport [2014] 1 W.L.R. 324 – the High Speed 2 judicial reviews;
  • R (Edwards) v Environment Agency (No 2) [2013] UKSC 78 – Aarhus costs.

Landmark Chambers is always at the vanguard of judicial review on the most significant environmental issues of the day. Some recent cases illustrate the range of issues with which we engage:

  • Air quality: R (Shirley) v SSCLG [2017] EWHC 2306 (Admin);
  • Fracking: Dean v Secretary of State for Energy [2017] EWHC 1998 (Admin) and Preston New Road Action Group and Gayzer Frackman v Secretary of State & Cuadrilla [2018] EWCA Civ 9.;
  • Windfarms: R (oao Mynnyd y Gwynt Ltd) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2018] EWCA Civ 231;
  • Airports: Sanders v Airports Commission [2013] EWHC 3754 (Admin); R (Hillingdon LBC) v Secretary of State for Transport [2010] J.P.L. 97;
  • Flooding: R (on the application of Watermead Parish Council) v Aylesbury Vale DC  [2018] P.T.S.R. 43R (Sharp) v North Essex Magistrates’ Court [2017] EWCA Civ 1143;
  • Waste: R (Ellaway) v Cardiff City Council [2014] EWHC 836); R (on the application of FCC Environment (UK) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change [2015] Env. L.R. 22;
  • Road building: R (on the application of Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2016] Env. L.R. 1.
icon-accordion-chevron icon-arrow-left icon-arrow-right icon-chevron-down icon-chevron-left icon-cross icon-download icon-letter icon-linked-in icon-phone-outline icon-phone icon-search icon-search icon-select-chevron icon-top-right-corner icon-twitter