Fishermen win legal battle over river pollution
Pickering Fishery Association and environmental organisation Fish Legal took the government to the High Court over the health of the Costa Beck near Pickering.
The High Court ruled in 2023 that the government's management plan for once-thriving fishing spot was insufficient, with the groups arguing fish populations had declined dramatically in recent decades because of pollution.
The government challenged the decision, but the appeal was dismissed in a judgment handed down on Wednesday.
Andrew Kelton, solicitor for Fish Legal, said Wednesday's decision should be "a turning point for improving river health nationwide".
He added: "This comprehensive win for us in the Court of Appeal sets out a blueprint for restoring damaged rivers across the whole country."
A Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs spokesperson said the government was "determined to clean up our polluted rivers, lakes and seas" and that it was "considering this judgment".
They added: "We recognise there are problems with the current system, which is why we have launched an Independent Water Commission, which is looking at widespread water sector reform including the effectiveness of the Water Framework Directive and River Basin Management Plans.
"We will continue to support the Environment Agency and its partners as they continue their work to improve the water environment in North Yorkshire and across England."
But Penelope Gane, head of practice at Fish Legal, said: "[The government] could have dropped this appeal, but instead they have dragged out the legal process, wasting time and taxpayer money trying to defend continued inaction to restore not only the Costa Beck, but rivers nationwide."
Only 16% of waterbodies and 14% of rivers in England currently had "good ecological status", she added.
Listen to highlights from North Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Fishermen win landmark river legal case
Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News24
2 days ago
- News24
Amnesty backs legal fight as UK moves to terror-list Palestine Action group
The UK government successfully passed legislation through both houses of parliament to ban the Palestine Action campaign group under the Terrorism Act of 2000. The ban was announced after Palestine Action activists broke into a UK air force base and caused an estimated £7 million ($9.55 million) in damage by spraying red paint on two aircraft, among other previous attacks. The group and rights organisations, including Amnesty International, are mounting an urgent legal challenge at the High Court to stop the proscription. A UK government move to ban the Palestine Action campaign group under anti-terror laws cleared parliament on Thursday but faces a court challenge to stop the proscription becoming law. Peers in parliament's House of Lords upper chamber backed the move to proscribe the group under the Terrorism Act of 2000 without a vote, a day after MPs approved the legislation. The government announced it would ban Palestine Action after activists from the group broke into an air force base in southern England last week. Two aircraft at the base were sprayed with red paint, causing an estimated £7 million ($9.55 million) in damage. The group has condemned the proposed proscription as an 'unhinged reaction'. An urgent hearing to challenge the ban is set to be held at the High Court in London on Friday. The legal challenge is backed by Amnesty International and other rights groups. The proposed ban on Palestine Action would make it a criminal offence to belong to or support the group, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Announcing the clamp-down, interior minister Yvette Cooper listed other attacks by Palestine Action at the Thales defence factory in Glasgow in 2022, and two last year against Instro Precision in Kent, southeast England, and Israel-based Elbit Systems in Bristol, in the country's southwest. Thursday's approval by the Lords came as four Palestine Action activists were remanded in custody over the break-in. Counter-terror police on Wednesday charged the four suspects with 'conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, and conspiracy to commit criminal damage.' Prosecutors will argue the offences were terror-linked. Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 35, Jony Cink, 24, and Lewie Chiaramello, 22, appeared at London's Westminster Magistrate's Court. They were remanded in custody until their next appearance at London's Old Bailey criminal court on 18 July. A 41-year-old woman who was arrested 'on suspicion of assisting an offender' has been released on bail.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Home Secretary: Government accepts court ruling on ‘serious failing' by MI5
The Home Secretary has said she is 'deeply concerned' that MI5 gave false evidence to the High Court and that the Government accepts a further investigation should take place. Yvette Cooper told MPs that 'internal processes at MI5 must improve' after three judges ruled on Wednesday that a further investigation should be carried out into how it came to give incorrect evidence to the High Court in a bid to secure an injunction against the BBC. Then-attorney general Suella Braverman asked the court for the injunction in 2022, which prevented the BBC from disclosing information likely to identify a man who allegedly abused two women and is a covert human intelligence source. But at a hearing earlier this year, the court was told that part of the written evidence provided by MI5 was false. The Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Chamberlain ruled on Wednesday that, while it was 'premature' for contempt of court proceedings to be launched against the organisation, a further investigation should be carried out as probes conducted by MI5 into the matter 'suffer from serious procedural deficiencies'. In a statement on Thursday, Ms Cooper told MPs that MI5 must 'always maintain the highest of standards and rigour'. She said: 'I remain deeply concerned that inaccurate evidence was provided to the High Court and Investigatory Powers Tribunal. This was a serious failing by MI5. 'The Government accepts the High Court's conclusion that a 'further, robust and independent investigation' should take place. I will provide further details to the House in due course. 'I have also asked the attorney general to conduct an internal review of how evidence from MI5 should be prepared and presented in future, to respond to the court's specific findings on witness statements in this regard. 'Alongside this I have asked my officials to review the wider issues raised by this case. 'The vital work MI5 does every day keeps our country safe and saves lives in the face of myriad threats. 'We owe them a debt of gratitude for the work they do. 'But that is also why it is essential that they always maintain the highest of standards and rigour, including in responding to the courts.' Following the ruling, MI5 director-general Sir Ken McCallum offered a 'full and unreserved apology for the errors made in these proceedings'.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
‘Premature' to decide whether MI5 should face contempt probe, judges rule
MI5 could still face contempt of court proceedings over incorrect evidence provided in a bid for an injunction against the BBC pending the outcome of an investigation, judges at the High Court have said. In 2022, then-attorney general Suella Braverman went to the High Court to stop the broadcaster airing a programme that would name a man who has allegedly abused two women and is a covert human intelligence source. An injunction was made in April 2022 to prevent the corporation disclosing information likely to identify the man, referred to only as 'X', though Mr Justice Chamberlain said the BBC could still air the programme and the key issues, without identifying him. But at a hearing earlier this year, the London court was told that part of the written evidence provided by MI5 was false. Lawyers for the BBC told the court the 'low threshold' for launching contempt proceedings against MI5 and a number of individuals, for not being fully transparent with the court, had been met. In a decision on Wednesday, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said that a further investigation should be carried out and that it would be 'premature to reach any conclusions on whether to initiate contempt proceedings against any individual'. The senior judge said that the new investigation should be carried out on behalf of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner. Baroness Carr, sitting with Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Chamberlain, also said: 'The investigations carried out by MI5 to date suffer from serious procedural deficiencies. 'Their conclusions cannot presently be relied on.' Following the ruling, MI5 director-general Sir Ken McCallum said: 'I wish to repeat my full and unreserved apology for the errors made in these proceedings. 'We take our duty to provide truthful, accurate and complete information with the utmost seriousness. 'Resolving this matter to the court's satisfaction is of the highest priority for MI5 and we are committed to co-operating fully with the Investigatory Powers Commissioner's Office and the court.'
