Judgment: 2020-05-15 · Court archive

High Court delays EU court reference while Attorney General considers joining planning case

Mr Justice Garrett Simons deferred drawing up a reference order until the Attorney General’s possible participation was resolved. The Attorney General was given until 5 June 2020 to seek joinder.

High Court ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Ardstone Homes Ltd
  • Attorney General
What

Mr Justice Garrett Simons deferred drawing up a reference order until the Attorney General’s possible participation was resolved. The Attorney General was given until 5 June 2020 to seek joinder.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 24 April 2020

    The case concerns a challenge to a planning permission. In an initial judgment delivered electronically on 24 April 2020, the High Court decided to seek guidance under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union about its obligations under the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive. In particular, the court proposed asking whether it might have to rule on the permission’s validity even though the applicants wished to withdraw their proceedings.

  • 5 June 2020; 19 June 2020

    The Attorney General was given liberty to apply to be joined by 5 June 2020, with a return date of 19 June. Other parties could respond by close of business on 15 June. The case was listed for a remote directions hearing before the judge at 10am on 19 June 2020. Any motion papers were to be sent to the Registrar by noon on 17 June.

Why

Read the report below for the decision and any reasons given.

The High Court deferred drawing up a formal order referring a planning case to the Court of Justice of the European Union while the Attorney General considers whether to join the proceedings.

In a ruling delivered on 15 May 2020, Mr Justice Garrett Simons said the order would not be drawn up until the Attorney General’s participation in the case had been resolved. The court said the separate question of any further stay pending an appeal would be addressed if it arose.

The case concerns a challenge to a planning permission. In an initial judgment delivered electronically on 24 April 2020, the High Court decided to seek guidance under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union about its obligations under the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive. In particular, the court proposed asking whether it might have to rule on the permission’s validity even though the applicants wished to withdraw their proceedings.

A draft reference was attached to that judgment. The parties were invited to identify errors before the formal order was drawn up. The developer, Ardstone Homes Ltd, submitted detailed comments, which the judge said would be considered when settling the final terms of the reference.

The Attorney General, through the Chief State Solicitor’s Office, asked the court to defer the order for a further 21 days. The Attorney General wanted time to consider counsel’s advice and whether to apply to join as a notice party. The letter also said the Attorney General was considering whether the initial judgment might be appealed, referring to recent Supreme Court and EU court rulings.

The judge described the request for time as reasonable and said his tentative view was that the Attorney General should be allowed to intervene, subject to hearing the other parties. The ruling did not decide any joinder application or appeal.

The Attorney General was given liberty to apply to be joined by 5 June 2020, with a return date of 19 June. Other parties could respond by close of business on 15 June. The case was listed for a remote directions hearing before the judge at 10am on 19 June 2020. Any motion papers were to be sent to the Registrar by noon on 17 June.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review