header-logo header-logo

09 September 2022
Issue: 7993 / Categories: Legal News , Environment
printer mail-detail

Post-Brexit enforcement of EU rules

European nature conservation laws remain enforceable against the Environment Agency, despite the UK having left the EU, the High Court has held in a landmark case

Ruling this week in Harris vs Environment Agency [2022] EWHC 2264 (Admin), Mr Justice Johnson held the Environment Agency failed to do enough to protect rare wetland species and habitats in the Norfolk Broads from the impact of water abstraction licenced by the Environment Agency for agricultural and other purposes. He found the Environment Agency acted irrationally, in breach of European law (the Habitats Directive) and in breach of domestic law.

In his decision, Johnson J recognised and applied a key, but little-known, legal provision in the UK’s EU-exit legislation, which says rules in European Directives remain enforceable against UK public authorities post-Brexit if those rules had been recognised by a court as being enforceable prior to Brexit. In Harris, the provision applied to rules under the Habitats Directive.

He also held the Environment Agency could not use lack of funding as a valid justification for failing to comply with its legal duties in this case.

Penny Simpson, environmental law partner at Freeths, who represented claimants Mr and Mrs Harris, said: ‘This is a very important court judgment for both East Anglia and the UK.

‘For East Anglia there must now be significant and urgent work by the Environment Agency to prevent damage from water abstraction to the large Broads conservation area.

‘For England and Wales, we now know that public authorities must take appropriate steps to prevent harm to sites protected under the Habitats Directive.

‘For the UK as a whole, this case has wide-reaching implications. It recognises that, even though the UK has left the EU, the UK has not escaped the direct influence of European Directives if, prior to Brexit, those rules had been found by a court to be directly enforceable against public authorities.

‘Where this applies, individuals can continue to rely upon those rules against public authorities. This would be the case even if Parliament were to amend or remove specific existing domestic legislation which implements a European Directive.’

Issue: 7993 / Categories: Legal News , Environment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

back-to-top-scroll