header-logo header-logo

27 January 2011
Issue: 7450 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Going batty

Bats have lost out in a legal battle over a proposed roadway.
In Morge (FC) v Hampshire County Council [2011] UKSC 2, the Supreme Court considered the extent of the UK’s obligation under the Habitats Directive to prohibit “deliberate disturbance” of certain species of bats.

The council granted planning permission for a three-mile stretch of roadway that would be used to provide a rapid bus service. Environmental objectors contended that the proposed route would result in a loss of bat foraging habitat and would sever a bat flight path.

The Supreme Court ruled on the level of “disturbance” required to engage the prohibition, and the obligation on local authorities to pay regard to the Directive.

Dismissing the appeal 4–1, the court held the Directive protected species not habitats, and protected “species” and not “specimens of these species”. An assessment was required as to the nature and extent of the impact on the species. Activity during the period of breeding, rearing, hibernation and migration were more likely to have a sufficient negative impact on the species to constitute “disturbance”.

Nevertheless, the court decided that planning permission should ordinarily be granted except where this would be likely to offend the Directive.
 

Issue: 7450 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll