This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/wales/6053146.stm
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 1 | Version 2 |
---|---|
Appeal opens on opencast decision | |
(about 11 hours later) | |
The Welsh assembly has begun an appeal against a High Court decision which halted plans for one of Europe's biggest opencast sites. | |
It won the right to a hearing at the Court of Appeal after a judge quashed a decision to allow the coal operation at Ffos-y-Fran, Merthyr Tydfil. | |
There has been a long-running dispute over plans to extract 10m tonnes of coal there over 15 years. | |
The case in London is expected to last for three days, with a decision later. | |
Last December Mr Justice Lindsay quashed a decision to give the go-ahead for the scheme on the grounds that Environment Minister Carwyn Jones appeared to have already decided to give it the green light, before the meeting to approve it was held. | |
Mr Jones has strongly denied that claim, and the assembly challenged the decision, arguing that it was never proven that he made the comment. | |
In the findings under challenge, the judge said that retired civil servant Jenni Jones, who can see Ffos-y-Fran from her bedroom window and was concerned for her two boys, had claimed that Mr Jones had told her the day before the meeting he was "going to go with the inspector's report" backing the scheme. | |
The judge said that there was no clear denial in respect of the alleged statement, and he concluded that there had been an "unacceptable possible pre-determination" on the part of Mr Jones. | |
However, challenging that decision, assembly counsel Timothy Corner argued that in reaching his decision, the judge failed to make an express finding as to whether Mr Jones had even said what Ms Jones claimed. | |
He said: "The claimant's case of apparent bias was founded upon the utterance of these words. | |
"He does not make a clear finding that Mr Jones did or did not utter the words. The failure to make a clear finding was an error of law. | |
"The court nevertheless adopted a flawed approach in concluding that these seven words constituted circumstances that would lead a fair-minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real possibility that the committee was biased. | |
"The conclusion reached by the court was simply not the correct one even on the evidence that was before the court. | |
"The fair-minded and informed observer, being neither complacent nor unduly sensitive nor suspicious, when he examined the facts that he could look at, would not have come to a definitive view in relation to something so serious as bias relying solely upon the utterance of seven words in a chance setting." | |
He also argued that the judge was also wrong to refuse to admit a late witness statement from Mr Jones. | |
Opponents in Merthyr Tydfil had claimed they would suffer from noise, dust and vibration problems if opencast was allowed, with plans to extract 20,000 tonnes of coal each week. | Opponents in Merthyr Tydfil had claimed they would suffer from noise, dust and vibration problems if opencast was allowed, with plans to extract 20,000 tonnes of coal each week. |
Miller Argent (South Wales) Ltd had earlier received permission from the assembly planning committee. | Miller Argent (South Wales) Ltd had earlier received permission from the assembly planning committee. |
It claimed it would create 200 jobs and transform 1,000 acres of a derelict industrial wasteland after reclamation. | It claimed it would create 200 jobs and transform 1,000 acres of a derelict industrial wasteland after reclamation. |
The developer said the site had suffered from fly-tipping and burnt-out cars being dumped there. | The developer said the site had suffered from fly-tipping and burnt-out cars being dumped there. |
A planning inspector concluded there was no evidence to back up "sincerely held" worries over health and the environment. | A planning inspector concluded there was no evidence to back up "sincerely held" worries over health and the environment. |