While we are confident that we can answer these points, we are concerned that, having regard to para 9(2) of the regulations, the inspector will have to refer the EIA question to the Secretary of State (with all the extra time and expense that will entail) even if the objectors advance no more than a plausible case. Do you share our concerns?
Q An inspector will shortly hear our appeal against a refusal of permission for a housing development. Opposition will come from a local action group, which claims that, although the relevant area is less than 0.5ha, our proposal nevertheless amounts to an “urban development project” for the purpose of the 1999 Environment Impact Regulations. It will argue that the area is sensitive and that similar projects will bring about a cumulative effect.
While we are confident that we can answer these points, we are concerned that, having regard to para 9(2) of the regulations, the inspector will have to refer the EIA question to the Secretary of State (with all the extra time and expense that will entail) even if the objectors advance no more than a plausible case. Do you share our concerns?
A No: see Berkeley v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2001] EWCA Civ 1012; [2001] 28 EG 141 (CS), which held that the inspector is under no duty to refer if, at the end of the day, he is satisfied that an EIA is not required.
