Covid-19 has resulted, on the whole, in a marked co-operation between contracting authorities and their suppliers as everybody focuses on maintaining delivery as far as possible.
Our client, and the other claimants, were concerned as to the quality of recycling that would be collected if the Regulations were implemented as proposed.
Subsequently, proceedings were paused to enable the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Welsh Government to reconsider their position. This led to the announcement of a consultation on the policy and plans to amend the English and Welsh regulations. Many saw this as an admission by Defra and the Welsh Government that the Regulations failed to adequately transpose the EU Directive.
However, in April 2012, during the consultation process, the Claimants were forced to challenge the proposed amended regulations, on the grounds that the revised Waste (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 still failed to comply with the requirements of the EU Directive.
On 25 February 2013, the High Court in Cardiff will finally hear the Claimants’ Judicial Review application and will ascertain whether DEFRA and the Welsh Government have correctly transposed the EU Directive into UK law.
The Claimants believe that despite a consultation process and the publication of the Waste (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 that these regulations, which are currently in force, fail to adequately transpose the EU Directive. The Claimants are of the opinion that the only way to guarantee high quality recycling is for councils to seperate recyclables at source.
About half of councils in England and Wales collect recyclable materials through co-mingling, where waste streams (such as paper, glass, plastic and metal) are collected together and then separated later. However, the Claimants believe that this approach does not guarantee high-quality waste which can then be recycled and therefore does not adhere to the requirements of the EU Directive.
The recent publication of DEFRA's Quality Action Plan seems to support some of the Claimants’ views. The report states that 'current recycling rates are likely to be overestimates as many do not account for material rejected by the Material Recovery Facility (MRF) during the sorting process in a robust manner'. The reports states that a survey found that 60% of reprocessing managers said that only 'some' or 'hardly any' of the material they are sent by the MRF is good enough to use. Three quarters of the reprocessing plants added that recycling material delivered by councils is of worse quality than that they receive from other suppliers.
The Claimants believe that strict adherence to the EU Directive and compelling councils to introduce 'separate' collections for glass, metals, papers and plastics would greatly increase the quality of recycling and reduce the amount of recycling material that is rejected by reprocessing plants. Whilst the UK has come a long way in the past 10 years where recycling is concerned, the delay in implementing 'separate' collections is impacting on the UK’s reputation as a place that takes recycling seriously.
As part of the Judicial Review hearing the High Court will also consider the Claimants’ application for the matter to be transferred to the Court of Justice of the European Union. This will enable the High Court to be given guidance from the European Court as to the true interpretation of the EU Directive, an issue which is currently in dispute between the parties.
For more information
As we enter a recession, we have been here before, and a key question is what did we learn and how can we benefit from that learning?
It is anticipated that as lockdown restrictions ease, and particularly with children and young adults returning to education, cases of meningitis will start to rise.
As we continue to emerge from lockdown measures and deal with local measures and the short and long term economic impact of Covid-19, local authorities will need to re-assess how services will be delivered for years to come.
The Government first announced plans for a shared ownership right to buy in October 2019. At the time the sector raised concerns about the impact the plans would have on housing associations ability to borrow. An election and a pandemic later the Government announced, during the CIH Housing Festival last week, the return of the right to shared ownership as part of its Affordable Homes Programme (AHP).
Two final pieces of the possession jigsaw have been published on 15 September 2020. Mr Justice Knowles’ working group on possession proceedings has issued its guidance on the “overall arrangements” for possession proceedings.
One change proposed by the Building Safety Bill is the introduction of a duty holder regime, which will see statutory responsibility for the safety of higher risk buildings placed on key individuals
Throughout this pandemic, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has been publishing various “Statements on Coronavirus” (Statements) which provide guidance on consumer rights during this time.
A recent increase in COVID-19 cases in the UK means new measures are being put in place in an effort to reduce the risk of a second wave. Whilst the impact of COVID-19 continues to be felt, it is important to remain focused on the sector’s road to recovery.
Sometimes half an hour at a conference gives you the reality that has been staring you in the face all along. That was my experience watching “Change is on the Horizon”
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.