Judicial review appeal regarding a cattle shed and agricultural building extension dismissed

31st January 2023

Legal ALAMY E99 A4 P

Related Topics



In R. (on the application of Sahota) v Herefordshire Council the objector appealed against a refusal of a judicial review claim of the local authority’s decision to grant planning permission to erect a cattle shed and extend an agricultural building.

The appellant objected to the proposed development because it contemplated the expansion of livestock farming which would increase manure production and the spreading of manure on surrounding fields, which would run off into nearby watercourses. This included the River Wye, which is a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

The planning officer had sought advice from an ecology officer (B). His written advice claimed the floor area of the cattle shed fell below the trigger sizes for air pollution emissions as identified in Natural England’s SSSI Impact Risk Zone data set, so no detailed air emissions assessment was required, and no likely significant effects on any relevant SSSI were identified.

The officer’s report included B’s advice and stated as the site was outside the River Wye’s SAC there were no other triggers for a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) process, and no likely significant effects on any other relevant SSSI. The planning committee found no need to conduct an HRA on the basis of the officer’s advice and granted planning permission.

Under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, a competent authority is required to make an “appropriate assessment” of a plan’s implications in view of its conservation objectives.

At the judicial review hearing, the judge admitted B’s witness statement explaining his advice, and dismissed the judicial review claim on its merits. The appellant submitted the judge had erred in admitting B’s evidence, and the officer’s report had misled the planning committee into believing an HRA was not required.

The court could decide whether to admit evidence that came into existence after the decision under review had been made, as a means of correcting, or adding, to the reasons for it. Evidence directly in conflict with the record of the decision-making would not generally be admitted. The question was whether the evidence was confirmation not contradiction. Even when the evidence was merely explanatory, the court must ask itself whether it would be legitimate to admit the explanation. The judge had not fallen into error as a matter of principle and his conclusion had been reasonably open to him.

The question for the court was whether, on a fair reading of the entire report, the officer had materially misled the committee on a matter bearing on their decision, and the error went uncorrected before the decision was made. A competent authority was entitled and expected to give significant weight to the advice of an expert national agency with relevant expertise in nature conservation, such as Natural England. Although the authority could lawfully disagree with, and depart from, such advice, it had to have strong reasons for doing so. The court would give appropriate consideration to views of expert regulatory bodies.

B’s witness statement made it clear there were no relevant effects of the proposed development on the River Wye’s SAC, whether taken in isolation or in combination with other plans or projects. The appellant’s real complaint was B’s advice was wrong, but he had to show there were public law grounds which would entitle the court to intervene by way of judicial review, in particular a demonstrable error in the reasoning process, or the conclusion was irrational. The appeal was dismissed.


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

Transform articles

Fifth of UK food firms unprepared for deforestation regulation

One in five UK food businesses are not prepared for EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) coming into force in December, a new survey has uncovered.

16th May 2024

Read more

Regulatory gaps between the EU and UK are beginning to appear, warns Neil Howe in this edition’s environmental legislation round-up

4th April 2024

Read more

Dr Julie Riggs issues a call to arms to tackle a modern-day human tragedy

15th March 2024

Read more

The UK’s new biodiversity net gain (BNG) requirements could create 15,000 hectares of woodlands, heath, grasslands, and wetlands and absorb 650,000 tonnes of carbon each year.

13th March 2024

Read more

Campaign group Wild Justice has accused the UK government of trying to relax pollution rules for housebuilders “through the backdoor”.

14th February 2024

Read more

Digital tracking, packaging data delays and new collections provide a waste focus for this edition’s environmental round-up by legislation expert Neil Howe

28th November 2023

Read more

Environmental crimes could result in prison sentences of up to 10 years and company fines of 5% of turnover under a proposed EU law agreed by the European parliament and council.

21st 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