Home > Expertise > Planning and Infrastructure > Wildlife and Habitats

Landmark’s barristers have very extensive experience both of the EU Habitats Directive regime and of other legislation that protects wildlife. We act for central government, Natural England, local authorities and other public bodies, private developers and those who object to proposed development. In addition to court work, we regularly deal with wildlife and habitats issues at planning inquiries and DCO examinations and in environmental appeals. We also frequently advise on the application of the relevant legislation, in the context of individual decisions and also to the production of both national and local planning and environmental policy.

Our experience in this field spans a broad range of seniority: our practice managers will be happy to assist in providing a recommendation of appropriate counsel.

Landmark barristers have acted in the following significant litigation in this field:

  • The Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee hearing in Communication ACCC/C/2017/156;
  • R (Langton) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2020] Env. L.R. 10;
  • R (Langton) v Natural England [2020] Env. L.R. 1;
  • R (o.a.o. Mynnyd y Gwynt Ltd) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2018] EWCA Civ 231;
  • DLA Delivery Ltd v Baroness Cumberlege of Newick [2018] EWCA Civ 1305;
  • R (o.a.o. Mott) v Environment Agency [2018] 1 W.L.R. 1022;
  • R (o.a.o. Mynydd Y Gwynt Ltd) v SSBEIS [2018] Env. L.R. 22;
  • Ashdown Forest Economic Development LLP v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2016] P.T.S.R. 78;
  • R (o.a.o. Champion) v North Norfolk DC [2015] 1 W.L.R. 3710;
  • Newry Chamber of Commerce and Trade’s Application for Judicial Review [2015] NIQB 65;
  • R (o.a.o. Forest of Dean (Friends of the Earth)) v Forest of Dean DC [2015] P.T.S.R. 1460;
  • Smyth v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] P.T.S.R. 1417;Savage v Mansfield DC [2015] EWCA Civ 4;
  • R (o.a.o. Prideaux) v Buckinghamshire CC [2013] Env. L.R. 32;
  • R (Morge) v Hampshire CC [2011] 1 W.L.R. 268;
  • R (o.a.o. Hart DC) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2008] 2 P&CR 16;

Our inquiry experience in this area includes the following

  • Dibden Bay: a major inquiry into a new container port at Southampton;
  • Lough Neagh: an inquiry into the historic and future extraction of sand from the bed of Lough Neagh (a SPA, Ramsar Site and ASSI), planning permission not having been obtained for 80 years;
  • Itchen, Candover and Testwood: a three-week inquiry considering three water abstraction licences, raising issues under the Habitats Directive and Water Framework Directive;
  • Catfield Fen: a three-week inquiry into an appeal under the Water Resources Act 1991 against the Environment Agency’s refusal to renew water abstraction licences on Habitats Directive grounds owing to alleged impact on the Broads SAC.
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