This website is no longer actively maintained

For up-to-date information on the campaigns it represents please visit:

No Airport Expansion! is a campaign group that aims to provide a rallying point for the many local groups campaigning against airport expansion projects throughout the UK.

Visit No Airport Expansion! website

Manston – application for another legal challenge

A High Court judge announced that the legal challenge by local people, against the decision by the government to approve the DCO – to enable the airport to reopen, for air freight – was rejected.  Mr Justice Lane refused the application for a judicial review of government approval of Riveroak Strategic Partners’ (RSP) plans to redevelop the former airport into a cargo terminal, rejecting claims of procedural unfairness, climate considerations and need for a freight hub. Campaigners struck back swiftly. Ramsgate resident Jenny Dawes lodged a fresh legal bid that again hinges on the economic arguments used to justify the development and the climate cost of a new airport. Ms Dawes, who has been crowdfunding her legal efforts, and is liable for the costs of the first request, has called for a planning judge to review the decision. Ms Dawes’ action has received support from the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF), which is highly critical of the DfT approval. 
.

 

Manston air freight hub development can go ahead, but protestors won’t give up

By Alex Whiteman (The Loadstar)

26/01/2023

Anti-development campaigners were dealt a blow when a judge dismissed an plea for a judicial review of plans for the UK’s Manston Airport, and an appeal of the decision has already been lodged.

Mr Justice Lane refused the application for a judicial review of government approval of Riveroak Strategic Partners’ (RSP) plans to redevelop the former airport into a cargo terminal, rejecting claims of procedural unfairness, climate considerations and need for a freight hub.

Now, RSP appears increasingly bullish that, after years of delays and efforts to block the plan, it may finally be in a position to push ahead.

A spokesperson told The Loadstar: “We look forward to getting the process of turning Manston into a state of-the-art freight hub under way. And we look forward to working to support the long-term economic development of East Kent, through the reopening of Manston.”

Local MP Craig MacKinlay said despite “nine years of ups and down” there was still widespread support for the proposed redevelopment of the airport. He tweeted: “No impediments remain. Jobs, investment and a positive future. Thank you.”

But campaigners struck back swiftly. Ramsgate resident Jenny Dawes has lodged a fresh legal bid that again hinges on the economic arguments used to justify the development and the climate cost of a new airport.

Ms Dawes, who has been crowdfunding her legal efforts, and is liable for the costs of the first request, has called for a planning judge to review the decision.

She claims there would be “irreparable harm to the people, environment and economy of East Kent” from the redevelopment, adding that the judge’s decision was significant to the “process of decision making” by politicians.

“This is particularly the case, when experts, including independent examining authority and the government’s own advisers, recognised there is no need for Manston Airport,” she added.

Ms Dawes’ action has received support from the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF), which slammed the Department for Transport’s approval and subsequent reaffirmation of the development consent order last August.

AEF director Tim Johnson said: “The original decision by the examining authority recommended refusal, and that the environmental impacts couldn’t be justified. Local campaigners believe this is still the case and have vowed not to give up.”

However, Mr MacKinlay said: “Our legal system allows for judicial review when process is not followed, but attempts to use it as a means of overturning decisions not liked by a disgruntled few is not what it is for.”

https://theloadstar.com/manston-air-freight-hub-development-can-go-ahead-but-protestors-wont-give-up/

.


See earlier:

High Court judge rejects application to legally challenge August 2022 approval of Manston expansion plans

A DCO (Development Consent Order) for the re-opening of Manston airport, and its use mainly for air cargo was approved by the government in August 2022. Then local residents, through Jenny Dawes, made an application for permission to get a Judicial Review of the decision, on 29th September 2022.  A High Court judge has now announced that this legal challenge has been rejected.  In her 1,200-page appeal, Jenny said the reopening “Manston Airport will cause irreparable harm to the people, environment and the economy of east Kent”.  The airport owners, RiverOak Strategic Partners’ (RSP), have applied for permission to upgrade and reopen the airport primarily as a freight airport, with some passenger services, with a capacity of at least 12,000 air cargo movements per year.  The plans were given the go ahead in August despite planners recommending that the development consent order application (DCO) be refused.  An earlier DCO for development of Manston as a freight airport was rejected by the High Court in February 2021.This was after Secretary of State for Transport, Grant Shapps, in July 2020 had decided to ignore the advice of the Planning Inspectorate in October 2019, that the DCO should be rejected.

Click here to view full story…

Update on Support Judicial Review of Manston Airport DCO

29.9.2022

An Application for Permission for Judicial Review of the Second Manston DCO was submitted on 29 September 2022.

This application builds on the original campaign which succeeded in getting the First Manston DCO quashed and caused the Secretary of State for Transport to carry out three further consultations before issuing a fresh decision on 18 August 2022.

This second decision, while not repeating all the errors in the first decision, is also flawed

More than £119k was raised through CrowdJustice to fund the original campaign. Additional contributions included other donations as well as costs awarded against the DfT. (Costs were also awarded against the Interested Party, the developer RiverOak Strategic Partners, but so far they have declined to pay.)

All this money was used to pay the solicitors, barristers and consultants, as well as miscellaneous disbursements like court costs, over what turned out to be a long and complicated case.

The small amount left was rolled over to support the second campaign and is held by the solicitors.

You can follow the progress of this new campaign at: CrowdJustice: Manston 2

 

.

.

.