0
On 23 July 2025 the High Court in R. (on the application of Saferwaters Ltd) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2025] EWHC 1885 (Admin) (Waksman J) dismissed a judicial review against the Secretary of State’s decision authorising the publication of the water resources management plans (“WRMPs”) of a number of water companies.
The claimants argued that the Secretary of State had acted unlawfully in failing to exercise their discretion to order a public inquiry or hearing pursuant to the Water Resources Management Plan Regulations 2007 reg.5(1) before making their decision to publish the WRMPs.
Among the arguments rejected by the Court was one based on the Aarhus Convention.
The claimants argued that involving the public by means of holding a public inquiry was consistent with "the wider legal framework". In this regard, they sought to place particular reliance on Article 6(2) and (3) of the Aarhus Convention which require the public to be both informed and given the opportunity to participate in environmental decision-making.
The Judge rejected this argument holding (at para. 208) that the Convention is unincorporated and also that “it adds nothing in any event. Members of the public were informed and did have a right to participate (through making representations) in this particular process. The issue is a far more granular one, namely what particular element of this process was required as a matter of fairness.”
The Judge’s conclusions reflect very closely the arguments advanced by the Secretary of State in that case to the effect that Articles 6(2) and (3) do not require an oral hearing, with Article 6(7) (to which the claimants did not refer) requiring only that procedures for public participation allow the public to submit comments in writing “or, as appropriate at a public hearing” and that “[i]n any event, the Aarhus Convention is unincorporated. It is not directly effective (see Morgan v Hinton Organics [2010] 1 Costs LR 1 per Carnwath LJ (as he then was) at paras. 22, 47 and 50) and is given expression in domestic law through, for example, the various Environmental Impact Assessment regulations and procedures.”
This blog post was written by James Maurici KC.
----------------
Authors of the Aarhus blogs
– James Maurici KC – James has been in many of the leading cases on Aarhus costs including: R (RSPB) v SSJ [2017] 5 Costs L.O. 691; Case C 530/11 Commission v United Kingdom; Case C-260/11 Edwards v EA; R (Edwards) v EA (No.2) [2011] 1 Costs L.R. 70 and [2013] UKSC 78; and R (Edwards) v EA [2011] 1 W.L.R. 79. He has also appeared a number of times before the UNECE Aarhus Compliance Committee in Geneva, cases include: ACCC/C/2010/45; ACCC/C/2010/53; ACCC/C/2011/60; ACCC/C/2011/61; ACCC/C/2012/77; and ACCC/C/2014/100 and 101. He is currently acting for the UK Government on the Brexit communication to the Compliance Committee – ACCC/C/2017/150. He was one of the contributors to the Aarhus Convention: A Guide for UK Lawyers (2015) and he has written and lectured extensively on the Aarhus Convention.
– Jacqueline Lean – Jacqueline has also been instructed on a number of matters concerning the Aarhus Convention, including appearing (with James Maurici KC) for United Kingdom before the Aarhus Compliance Committee on two communications concerning the Government’s decision to proceed with HS2 (ACCC/C/100 & 101); representing the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Secretary of State in R (CPRE Kent) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2019] EWCA Civ 1230 in which the Court of Appeal considered the approach to summary assessment of costs at permission stage when an Aarhus costs cap applied; and acting for the Secretary of State in R (RSPB) v Secretary of State for Justice [2018] Env LR 13, a challenge to the Government’s amendments to the Aarhus costs protections in the CPR (also with James Maurici KC). She is also a contributing author to Coppel’s ‘Information Rights’ on Environmental Information.
– Nick Grant – Nick joined Chambers in 2019 and has regularly advised on Aarhus related matters. He has represented the UK twice before the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, appearing with James Maurici KC in ACCC/C/2017/150 (the Withdrawal Act case) and unled in the admissibility hearing for ACCC/C/2022/194 (the free trade agreements case).
– Alex Shattock – Alex has been involved in a number of environmental claims including Friends of the Earth v SSLUHC (the Cumbria coal mine case: acting for Friends of the Earth in the Planning Inquiry and High Court, with Paul Brown KC and Toby Fisher); Cox and Ors v Oil and Gas Authority [2022] EWHC 75 (Admin) (representing Extinction Rebellion activists in a challenge to the Oil and Gas Authority’s Strategy, with David Wolfe KC and Merrow Golden); R (Hough) v SSHD [2022] EWHC 1635 (acting for the claimant in an environmental and equalities challenge to the controversial use of Napier Barracks as asylum seeker accommodation, with Alex Goodman KC and Charles Bishop). He regularly advises individual and NGO clients on Aarhus costs protection. Alex also has a keen interest in treaty law generally. He has a masters and PhD in public international law and has been involved in various treaty negotiations and treaty ratification processes.
