Judicial review over Plymouth tree felling ‘academic’, High Court judge rules

A High Court judge has ruled that a legal challenge against Plymouth City Council’s controversial redevelopment plans, which saw the local authority fell more than a hundred trees, is academic.

The legal action was based on a decision made by the previous council administration, which was overturned in May 2023 by the new council leader.

The dispute dates back to March 2023, when the council conducted a late-night operation to cut down more than a hundred trees on Armada Way. Works were stopped short by a last-minute injunction secured by campaign group ‘Save the Trees of Armada Way’ (STRAW).

The group launched a legal challenge against the decision by Plymouth's former Mayor Richard Bingley to chop down most of the trees, and permission was granted for a substantive hearing of the claim.

In June, the council asked the High Court to dismiss the case without a hearing, arguing that the claim was now academic.

Mrs Justice Lang dismissed the application as "misconceived" and ordered the council to pay the claimant's costs of the application regardless of the outcome of the litigation.

Last month, new litigation was threatened over a consultation on a revised street scheme that the council launched following the injunction and judicial review application.

The revised scheme builds on the original plan and proposes keeping 13 of the trees saved by the injunction while 'translocating' six trees to somewhere else.

In its letter before claim, STRAW alleged that the consultation, which ran from October through to November 2023, failed to provide enough detail on the project's cost.

The letter argued that the council also failed to provide sufficient information about the trees' 'translocation' and the council's plans for its sustainable urban drainage system.

In the High Court yesterday (20 March), the judge threw out STRAW’s legal challenge, confirming that the judicial review was academic. 

A Plymouth City Council spokesperson, said: “The council is pleased that the judge has today thrown out STRAW’s legal challenge regarding Armada Way – confirming that the judicial review is indeed 'academic'. 

“We have always been very clear – the legal action was based on a redundant decision – a decision made by the previous Council administration, that was overturned in May 2023 by the new Council Leader. Following an extensive consultation and cross-party scrutiny, Cabinet approved new designs in February 2024. 

“It was never in the city’s best interests to argue the rights and wrongs of a decision that had been withdrawn and we are pleased that the judge has agreed."

The spokesperson added: "We agree with the judge that there are some learning points for the council around our internal processes. The judge recognised our plans to hold an independent learning review. We have made a commitment to the Court that this will be undertaken as soon as the remaining legal processes are over, with a Cabinet meeting planned for 20 May to agree the terms of reference.”

Responding to the judgment, STRAW said: “Had these proceedings not been brought we would not have saved any of the trees and would not have exposed the extensive wrongdoing of the council.

“Throughout this case, the council have, in the words of the judge, ‘not covered themselves in glory’ and at one point referred to the difficulty in extracting information and documents from them, which they were obliged to produce, akin to pulling teeth. Much of the crucial information required for the substantive grounds of the case, and information which could have been relied upon by the judge to determine whether the case was academic or exceptional or not, was only released within the last few days or indeed during the hearing. There is also still information that appears not to have been divulged at all.

“[…] What this decision has done is to set a precedent for public bodies to make unlawful decisions, carry out irreversible acts, and then be immune from legal challenge through judicial review. Not only that but councils can help their own case in avoiding repercussions by behaving badly in the aftermath, further restricting any chances of a case being brought against them. Basically, it’s a blueprint for irreversible, unlawful damage with very limited consequences.”

Lottie Winson