Case: Application to quash wind farm decision accepted

26th March 2021


Web p11 wind farm istock 637177002

Related Topics

Related tags

  • Health ,
  • Reporting ,
  • Waste

Author

Martin Broderick

In Pearce v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the claimant applied for an order quashing the Secretary’s consent for the Vanguard wind farm.

The project was related to the Boreas wind farm, and it was proposed they share onshore infrastructure. The interested party applied for consent for Vanguard and submitted an environmental statement assessing the cumulative landscape and visual impacts of both projects. It concluded there were likely to be adverse environmental effects.

The interested party then applied for consent for Boreas. When determining the Vanguard application, the Secretary decided information about the Boreas project was “limited” and should be considered during the Boreas application. The issue was whether the Secretary breached the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009 by not considering the overall cumulative impacts of both projects when determining the Vanguard application.

Under the Regulations, a decision-maker could not grant consent without being satisfied they had sufficient information to evaluate and assess likely environmental effects. The Secretary had breached the Regulations by failing to re-evaluate information on the cumulative impacts.

Where projects are linked, without any rational justification, cumulative impacts must be evaluated when granting consent in each case – even when little information about the second project is available. In this case, the Secretary’s excuse that information was “limited” was illogical and irrational, and several features required the cumulative impacts to be assessed as part of the Vanguard decision.

The reasons for postponing consideration of the cumulative impacts were inadequate. Even if it had been acceptable to suspend consideration, the statement that information on Boreas was “limited” did not stop the requirement for the decision to be adequately reasoned.

The court found no justification to withhold relief sought by the claimant, and quashed consent.

Image credit | iStock

Subscribe

Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.


Transform articles

Taking the lead

To make real change on sustainability, it’s time to redefine leadership models, writes Chris Seekings

1st February 2024

Read more

Caris Graham (she/her) is Diverse Sustainability Initiative officer at IEMA

1st February 2024

Read more

Lisa Pool reflects on the highlights of the past year and what they mean for the future

1st February 2024

Read more

The percentage of women working in the built environment sector rose significantly last year although people from ethnic minorities find it up to six times harder to be recruited, according to a major survey.

17th January 2024

Read more

IEMA’s CEO and deputy CEO, Sarah Mukherjee MBE and Martin Baxter, respectively, called for greater support for green skills at several events today on Youth, Children, Education and Skills Day at COP28.

8th December 2023

Read more

A look at the latest edition of Stephen Asbury’s IEMA-endorsed book, Health and Safety, Environment and Quality Audits, and the CPD opportunities it presents

28th November 2023

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close