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/england/suffolk/7766782.stm
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Man wins cliff home erosion case | Man wins cliff home erosion case |
| (30 minutes later) | |
| A retired engineer has won the latest stage of his fight to protect his Suffolk home from falling into the sea. | A retired engineer has won the latest stage of his fight to protect his Suffolk home from falling into the sea. |
| Natural England wanted fossil-bearing cliffs near Southwold to be allowed to erode raising the prospect that some homes could fall into the sea. | Natural England wanted fossil-bearing cliffs near Southwold to be allowed to erode raising the prospect that some homes could fall into the sea. |
| But Peter Boggis, 77, installed his own defences near his Easton Bavents home. | But Peter Boggis, 77, installed his own defences near his Easton Bavents home. |
| High Court judge Mr Justice Blair ruled Natural England's decision to permit erosion for "scientific reasons" was unlawful but it can appeal. | High Court judge Mr Justice Blair ruled Natural England's decision to permit erosion for "scientific reasons" was unlawful but it can appeal. |
| Living a nightmare | Living a nightmare |
| Mr Boggis said: "Mr Justice Blair's judgment lifts a great shadow from my mind and gives hope for the future for those that live by the coast of Britain. | Mr Boggis said: "Mr Justice Blair's judgment lifts a great shadow from my mind and gives hope for the future for those that live by the coast of Britain. |
| "We have lived a nightmare in recent years. Inconvenient or not to bureaucracy, the defence of the coast should not be walked away from." | "We have lived a nightmare in recent years. Inconvenient or not to bureaucracy, the defence of the coast should not be walked away from." |
| Natural England declared the area a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) in 2006, which prevented Mr Boggis from maintaining his sea defence barrier. | Natural England declared the area a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) in 2006, which prevented Mr Boggis from maintaining his sea defence barrier. |
| I think it is obviously in the interests of the people whose homes are threatened that the sooner this matter is brought on the better Mr Justice Blair | I think it is obviously in the interests of the people whose homes are threatened that the sooner this matter is brought on the better Mr Justice Blair |
| But he had argued that Natural England had no legal right to stop him saving his home. | But he had argued that Natural England had no legal right to stop him saving his home. |
| Mr Boggis spent tens of thousands of pounds building his own sea defences using 250,000 tonnes of compacted clay soils to prevent his home and 13 others nearby from eventually slipping into the North Sea. | Mr Boggis spent tens of thousands of pounds building his own sea defences using 250,000 tonnes of compacted clay soils to prevent his home and 13 others nearby from eventually slipping into the North Sea. |
| But the ruling means he will not be able to resume maintenance of his sea defences until the outcome of any appeal by Natural England. | But the ruling means he will not be able to resume maintenance of his sea defences until the outcome of any appeal by Natural England. |
| The judge ruled that the intention behind the SSSI was to allow the destruction of Mr Boggis's "soft sea defences" and the rapid erosion of the cliffs behind them. | The judge ruled that the intention behind the SSSI was to allow the destruction of Mr Boggis's "soft sea defences" and the rapid erosion of the cliffs behind them. |
| Mr Justice Blair said this amounted to "a plan or project" which might have an adverse effect on a special protection area (SPA) for birds to the north of the Mr Boggis' sea defences. | Mr Justice Blair said this amounted to "a plan or project" which might have an adverse effect on a special protection area (SPA) for birds to the north of the Mr Boggis' sea defences. |
| The judge ruled an "appropriate assessment" of the risk to the SPA should have been carried out to comply with the EU Habitats Directive. Natural England's failure to do so was contrary to its duties under European law. | The judge ruled an "appropriate assessment" of the risk to the SPA should have been carried out to comply with the EU Habitats Directive. Natural England's failure to do so was contrary to its duties under European law. |
| The judge said: "I think it is obviously in the interests of the people whose homes are threatened that the sooner this matter is brought on the better." | The judge said: "I think it is obviously in the interests of the people whose homes are threatened that the sooner this matter is brought on the better." |
| In a statement Natural England said it did not want to prevent Mr Boggis from protecting his home but he had not obtained planning permission from his local authority or a waste licence from the Environment Agency. | |
| The judge awarded Mr Boggis 80% of his legal costs. | The judge awarded Mr Boggis 80% of his legal costs. |