HS2 Supreme Court judgement won't be made until New Year

This Is Local London: File photo File photo

A JUDGEMENT over a Supreme Court appeal against the HS2 project will not be made until the New Year, a council chief has said.

Campaigners took their case to the highest court in the land after claiming a Strategic Environmental Assessment should have been undertaken before a government decision to proceed with the controversial scheme was made in January 2012.

The hearing took place in October but Chiltern District Council Leader Nick Rose said at the authority's cabinet meeting yesterday the resulting judgement will not be made before Christmas.

He said: "We are still awaiting the result of the judgement from the Supreme Court. We've been advised the judgement will not be handed down in this session. It will go into January or beyond - we don't really know.

"It won't be before Christmas, which we were hoping for. The hearing date was October 15 and 16 - it's already taken up quite a long time."

Chiltern District Council is one of three authorities, along with the London Borough of Hillingdon and North Warwickshire Borough Council, that contributed costs towards the appeal from their reserves.

The court action was brought by the Amersham based HS2 Action Alliance.

During the hearing the Department for Transport's lawyer, Tim Mould QC, said it is 'unarguable' HS2 would be environmentally damaging.

The panel of seven Supreme Court judges can refer the case to the European Court of Justice for advice if necessary.

Comments (1)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:17am Thu 19 Dec 13

edward walpole-brown 111 says...

I am adamant in my view that the ea assessment is seriously flawed with regard to the damage not researched by the government/hs2 ltd to the underground water aquifers along the line with the tunneling and cutting. I have noticed that the reference to tunneling addresses only the matter of water leaking into the tunnel and measures to prevent this - not the effect on the groundwater aquifers.
in the draft ea consultation document there was reference to the line being realigned to avoid the chiltern aquifer and this was the cause of it being moved.
surely from this lead derived from the chiltern society's initiative in having an independent expert hydrological assessment made, should be applied by the government to other aquifers. for example the groundwater aquifer supplying 52% of the fresh water to Coventry and Kenilworth - also that for leamington spa will be deep tunneled and cut through.
the knock on effect is very likely to be disasterous.
I also refer to the royal commission's report on global warming and the subsequent reports coallated but not widely published from the watercompanies, defra, etc. which voice the severe concerns with regard to the shortage of water by 2035 from all available traditional sources in the west and north of the country.
the recent water act does little more than 'fix the leak' whilst being heralded, as it were as the solution to the nation's water supply.
can this be part of the case - I hope so.
I can be reached forv further on Edwardboyle72@yahoo.
com

Edward Walpole-brown 111.
I am adamant in my view that the ea assessment is seriously flawed with regard to the damage not researched by the government/hs2 ltd to the underground water aquifers along the line with the tunneling and cutting. I have noticed that the reference to tunneling addresses only the matter of water leaking into the tunnel and measures to prevent this - not the effect on the groundwater aquifers. in the draft ea consultation document there was reference to the line being realigned to avoid the chiltern aquifer and this was the cause of it being moved. surely from this lead derived from the chiltern society's initiative in having an independent expert hydrological assessment made, should be applied by the government to other aquifers. for example the groundwater aquifer supplying 52% of the fresh water to Coventry and Kenilworth - also that for leamington spa will be deep tunneled and cut through. the knock on effect is very likely to be disasterous. I also refer to the royal commission's report on global warming and the subsequent reports coallated but not widely published from the watercompanies, defra, etc. which voice the severe concerns with regard to the shortage of water by 2035 from all available traditional sources in the west and north of the country. the recent water act does little more than 'fix the leak' whilst being heralded, as it were as the solution to the nation's water supply. can this be part of the case - I hope so. I can be reached forv further on Edwardboyle72@yahoo. com Edward Walpole-brown 111. edward walpole-brown 111
  • Score: -3

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree