Berkeley v Secretary of State for the Environment & Ors [2000] UKHL 36
The point in plain English: Environmental impact assessment is a legal process, not just a pile of environmental information. If EIA is required, a decision-maker cannot normally cure the failure by saying that the same material existed elsewhere or that the outcome would probably have been the same.
What the House of Lords decided
The case concerned redevelopment at Craven Cottage. The House of Lords held that the statutory EIA procedure had not been followed. Information scattered through reports and other documents was not an adequate substitute for the environmental statement and public-participation process required by the Directive and regulations.
The court rejected the idea that the permission should survive merely because the decision-maker might have reached the same conclusion after a lawful EIA process.
Why Berkeley matters
Berkeley remains a leading authority on the procedural importance of EIA. The detailed regulations considered in 2000 have been replaced; in England the current town and country planning regime is principally the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.
The enduring point is that required environmental assessment and public participation cannot be reduced to a retrospective paper-chase exercise.
Important legal note: Planning Geek is a planning consultancy, not a law firm. This page provides general planning information and is not legal advice. Case law must be read in its factual and legal context and may be affected by later judgments, legislation or policy. Where the original judgment is available, it remains the authoritative source. If the outcome matters to a live case or dispute, take advice from an appropriately qualified planning solicitor or barrister.
Copyright and licensing: Crown copyright and other rights in judgments and source material remain with the relevant rights holders. Where a judgment is reproduced from Find Case Law, it is used under the Open Justice Licence and the source should be acknowledged. Material obtained from other sources is reproduced only where the applicable terms permit it. Planning Geek does not claim copyright in the text of court judgments.