Green activists, whose protests are threatening to hold up the £172m scheme for a new runway at Manchester Airport, today won a reprieve from an order that they vacate the site.
The decision is likely to mean that they can stay put at least until the autumn, because within a month workers will be unable to go on site without disturbing nesting birds.
Last month the Court of Appeal upheld a possession order granted to Manchester Airport plc over the land occupied by the protesters.
But today Chadwick and Laws LLJ extended a seven-day “stay” – an order postponing implementation of the possession – pending moves by the protesters to seek leave from the House of Lords to appeal against the possession moves.
In their decision last month, the appeal judges granted a temporary stay to allow the appeal to be pursued. But today they were told that there had not been time for the appeal application to be lodged with the law lords.
Granting a further stay, Chadwick LJ ordered that the protesters must apply to the House of Lords by Monday next week and include a request for the case to be heard as quickly as possible.
However, he accepted that after the end of March there would be a “closed season” as far as site clearance was concerned. Workers would not be able to move in to begin the process of clearing the site of tunnels, walk-ways and tree-houses until October, when birds finish nesting on the site. Clearance is likely to take at least a month. Nevertheless, he added that in the autumn there would still be time for the runway to open on schedule by spring 2000.
If todays stay had not been granted, any appeal by the protesters would have been an academic exercise, because the possession warrant would have been executed and the site cleared immediately.
The land is owned by the National Trust and contains trees that need to be either lopped or felled in an “obstacle limitation” exercise to clear the flight-path into the proposed new runway. Manchester Airport plc have been granted a licence over the land by the National Trust.
The protesters argue that this licence does not entitle the airport company to possession.
PLS News 4/3/99
