header-logo header-logo

03 May 2012
Issue: 7512 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Environment

Mountpace Ltd v Haringey London Borough Council [2012] EWHC 698 (Admin), [2012] All ER (D) 117 (Apr)

On the proper construction of s 34(1)(c) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the duty of care imposed under that subsection on any person who produced waste was a duty to secure the results set out in s 34(1)(c), which was to be complied with on the occasion of a given transfer of waste; and the question as to what had been the reasonable measures applicable to him “in that capacity” to secure those results, had to be answered and assessed by reference to his capacity on that occasion in the circumstances prevailing on that occasion. It could be no defence in the event of proof of non-compliance with the duty under s 34(1), that in the particular circumstances, even if the duty had been fulfilled, there would still have been a transfer to an unauthorised person.
 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll