Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

The Queen (Claimant) on the application of National Grid Gas plc (previously Transco plc) – and – The Environment Agency (Defendant)

Country/Territory
United Kingdom
Type of court
Others
Date
May 17, 2006
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
High Court of Justice
Seat of court
London
Judge
Forbes
Reference number
[2006] EWHC 1083 (Admin)
Language
English
Subject
Legal questions, Land & soil
Keyword
Liability/compensation Polluted soil cleanups Soil pollution/quality
Abstract
The Claimant was National Grid Gas plc., previously Transco plc. Transco itself was previously known as British Gas plc, the company which succeeded to the property, rights and liabilities to which the state-owned British Gas Corporation ("BGC") was entitled upon privatization under the Gas Act 1986. By this claim for judicial review, Transco challenged a decision of the Defendant, the Environment Agency ("the EA") whereby the EA decided that Transco was an "appropriate person" within Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in respect of contaminated land on which a gas works formerly stood, but which was subsequently developed for housing and now consisted of privately owned residential properties. The effect of the EA’s decision that Transco was an "appropriate person" was to make Transco liable for a proportion of the costs of remediating the contamination in question. The basis of the EA’s decision was that the contamination had been caused by one or more of Transco’s statutory predecessors which operated at the site until 1965, when the site was sold to a company. Transco stressed that the liability in question was in respect of contaminating substances brought on to the land by one of Transco’s predecessors, not by Transco itself and that the liability was imposed under a statutory regime which created new liabilities, different from those which existed at the time the contaminating substances were brought on to the land. The Court interpreted the relevant provisions of the Environmental Protection Act and held that Parliament’s clear intention was that, where the contamination in question had been caused by a body such as British Gas or any of its statutory predecessors, the responsibility and thus the statutory liability for that pollution should pass to and be borne by that body’s successors in title. Besides that, the transferee company (acquiring all the assets, rights and liabilities of the transferor) should step into the shoes of the transferor, not only in terms of current actual liabilities, but also in respect of liabilities that would arise in the future in respect of the past activities of the transferor. It was immaterial whether such liability resulted from legislation already in force, or that which might be enacted in future. It was within the power of a sovereign Parliament to enact that liability should be imposed for contaminated land, based on acts undertaken before the new legislation. The application was dismissed.
Full text
grid_gas_v_enviro_0506.htm