High Speed 2 challenged in High Court
The £34 billion High Speed 2 rail link faces five High Court challenges from a group of 18 councils, Heathrow Hub Ltd, Aylesbury Park Golf Club and two from the HS2 Action Alliance.
The councils allege that the Department for Transport reached the decision through a flawed consultation and inadequate environmental assessment.
They are all members of the 51m Alliance, which is named after the estimated £51m cost of the project to each parliamentary constituency.
They say the information the DfT acted upon was not sufficiently accurate, and that impacts on communities and on other infrastructure – such as underground capacity at Euston – were not properly considered.
They also question how far proposals comply with environmental law and challenge the chosen route.
Judicial reviews question whether government decisions have been reached through the proper legal processes.
In the case of HS2, campaigners for the five reviews hope to force the DfT to reconsider its decision to back the project, to change the route, or to bring another round of consultations.
HS2 Action Alliance meanwhile is backing two judicial reviews, claiming the government has failed to comply with environmental law and to carry out a fair consultation.
The first phase of the HS2 scheme involves a London-Birmingham route being constructed by 2026, with a possible later ‘Y’ extension to Leeds and Manchester.
Heathrow Hub’s judicial review challenges the planned route. The company was set up to formulate plans to connect HS2 with other transport infrastructure, including Crossrail, the M25 and Eurostar, and prefers a different route with a new station at Heathrow.
Aylesbury Park Golf Club, which lies on the route, is also objecting to the scheme.
If a review is unsuccessful, parties can appeal the decision, potentially postponing and outcome until late next year. Rulings are expected in January 2013.
Buckinghamshire County Council leader and 51m Alliance chairman Martin Tett said: “We are doing this with immense reluctance; however, we feel that we have been left with no alternative.
“This immensely expensive project ignores the Davis Review of aviation policy, has an abysmal business case and represents extremely poor value for hard-pressed taxpayers’ money.
“Far better alternatives exist to build the infrastructure. The country desperately needs more quickly and at far lower cost.”
Camden Council leader Sarah Hayward said: “We remain strongly opposed to HS2 and have been disappointed by the government not listening to our concerns.
“The council will fight for every home and business, brick by brick.”
HS2AA director Hilary Wharf said the government “is trying to force through HS2 without following proper process”.
“We have two strong cases coming to court next week that expose how the government has been unlawfully taking short cuts in its decision-making processes,” she added.
“Our cases concern environmental issues and the consultation on compensation.”