Latest news with #CourtOfAppeal
Sky News
2 days ago
- Politics
- Sky News
Pressure grows to leave 'mad' Aarhus Convention used to block UK building projects
Pressure is growing to renegotiate or leave an international convention blamed for slowing building projects and increasing costs after a judge warned campaigners they are in danger of "the misuse of judicial review". Under the Aarhus Convention, campaigners who challenge projects on environmental grounds but then lose in court against housing and big infrastructure have their costs above £10,000 capped and the rest met by the taxpayer. Government figures say this situation is "mad" but ministers have not acted, despite promising to do so for months. The Tories are today leading the call for change with a demand to reform or leave the convention. In March, Sky News revealed how a computer scientist from Norfolk had challenged a carbon capture and storage project attached to a gas-fired power station on multiple occasions. Andrew Boswell took his challenge all the way the appeal court, causing delays of months at a cost of over £100m to the developers. In May, the verdict handed down by the Court of Appeal was scathing about Dr Boswell's case. "Dr Boswell's approach is, we think, a classic example of the misuse of judicial review in order to continue a campaign against a development… once a party has lost the argument on the planning merits," wrote the judges. They added: "Such an approach is inimical to the scheme enacted by parliament for the taking of decisions in the public interest," adding his case "betrays a serious misunderstanding of the decision of the Supreme Court" and "the appeal must therefore be rejected". Another case - against a housing development in a series of fields in Cranbrook, Kent - was thrown out by judges in recent weeks. The case was brought by CPRE Kent, the countryside challenge, to preserve a set of fields between two housing developments alongside an area of outstanding natural beauty. John Wotton, from CPRE Kent, suggested it would have been hard to bring the challenge without the costs being capped. "We would've had to think very carefully about whether we could impose that financial risk on the charity," he told Sky News. After his case was dismissed, Berkeley Homes said the situation was "clearly absurd and highlights how incredibly slow and uncertain our regulatory system has become". They added: "We welcome the government's commitment to tackle the blockages which stop businesses from investing and frustrate the delivery of much needed homes, jobs and growth. "We need to make the current system work properly so that homes can actually get built instead of being tied-up in bureaucracy by any individual or organisation who wants to stop them against the will of the government." 'Reform could breach international law' Around 80 cases a year are brought under the Aarhus Convention, Sky News has learned. The way Britain interprets Aarhus is unique as a result of the UK's distinctive legal system and the loser pays principle. Barrister Nick Grant, a planning and environment expert who has represented government and campaigns, said the convention means more legally adventurous claims. "What you might end up doing is bringing a claim on more adventurous grounds, additional grounds, running points - feeling comfortable running points - that you might not have otherwise run. "So it's both people bringing claims, but also how they bring the claims, and what points they run. This cap facilitates it basically." However, Mr Grant said that it would be difficult to reform: "Fundamentally, the convention is doing what it was designed to do, which is to facilitate access to justice. "And it then becomes a question for the policymakers as to what effect is this having and do we want to maintain that? It will be difficult for us to reform it internally without being in breach of our international law obligations" In March, Sky News was told Number 10 is actively looking at the convention. Multiple figures in government have said the situation with Britain's participation in the Aarhus Convention is "mad" but Sky News understands nothing of significance is coming on this subject. The Tories, however, want action. Robert Jenrick, shadow justice secretary and former housing minister, said the Tories would reform or leave the convention. He told Sky News: "I think the country faces a choice. Do we want to get the economy firing on all cylinders or not? "We've got to reform the planning system and we've got to ensure that judicial review... is not used to gum up the system and this convention is clearly one of the issues that has to be addressed. "We either reform it, if that's possible. I'm very sceptical because accords like this are very challenging and it takes many many years to reform them. "If that isn't possible, then we absolutely should think about leaving because what we've got to do is put the interest of the British public first." Mr Jenrick also attacked the lawyers who work on Aarhus cases on behalf of clients. "A cottage industry has grown. In fact, it's bigger than a cottage industry," he said.
Free Malaysia Today
2 days ago
- Politics
- Free Malaysia Today
Anwar's constitutional reference appeal for case management tomorrow
Anwar Ibrahim wants the Court of Appeal to refer eight legal questions, which he said arise from a civil suit brought by former research assistant Yusoff Rawther, to the Federal Court for determination. PUTRAJAYA : The Court of Appeal has brought forward case management of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's constitutional reference appeal to tomorrow, with a view to disposing of the case on an expedited basis. Anwar is appealing against the High Court's refusal to refer eight legal questions – which he claims arise from a civil suit brought by former research assistant Yusoff Rawther – to the Federal Court for determination. An e-mail sent out by senior assistant registrar Ahmad Izuddin Fajri Fakrullah, sighted by FMT, said the case management was being brought forward as the appeals court bench had indicated this morning that an early hearing should be held. As such, Izuddin said case management, previously scheduled for Sept 2, has been brought forward to tomorrow. Lawyer Rafique Rashid Ali, appearing for Yusoff, who filed his suit in 2021 against Anwar over an alleged assault, confirmed the matter. 'The case management will be held online,' he said when contacted. Earlier today, a three-member bench chaired by Justice Ruzima Ghazali said the stay should be granted as Anwar had shown special circumstances. Ruzima, who sat with Justices Wong Kian Kheong and Lim Hock Leng, however, said parties were at liberty to apply for an early hearing date. On June 4, High Court Justice Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed Anwar's reference application and directed that the trial proceed on the seven days previously set between June 16 and June 25. In her decision, Roz Mawar said none of the questions posed in the application had crossed the threshold set out in Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 to justify a referral to the apex court. In a 21-page judgment, she said the application was misconceived as to the jurisdiction of the courts and based on speculative doctrines with no constitutional footing. On June 10, the Court of Appeal granted Anwar an interim stay pending today's hearing of the prime minister's stay application. The prime minister wants the apex court to determine whether Articles 5(1), 8(1), 39, 40 and 43 of the Federal Constitution grant him qualified immunity from the suit filed by Yusoff four years ago. Yusoff's suit relates to events which allegedly took place before Anwar took office on Nov 22, 2022. A grandson of the late Penang consumer advocate SM Mohamed Idris, Yusoff claims he was assaulted at Anwar's home in Segambut in October 2018. He is seeking general, special, aggravated and exemplary damages, as well as interest, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court. Anwar denies the claim and has filed a countersuit.
Free Malaysia Today
2 days ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Indian national gets 35 years' jail, whipping for murdering countryman
The Court of Appeal reduced K Alagesan's sentence to 35 years in prison and 12 strokes of the rotan for murdering a man at a home in Petaling Jaya five years ago. PUTRAJAYA : An Indian national who pleaded guilty in the High Court to killing a countryman at an old folks home nearly five years ago had his jail term and whipping reduced by the Court of Appeal today. K Alagesan, 33, was sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment for the murder of Sugan Ganesan at the home in Petaling Jaya on Sept 9, 2020. The appellate court also ordered Alagesan to be whipped 12 times, the minimum allowed under the law for murder. Last year, High Court judge Norsharidah Awang sentenced him to 38 years' jail and ordered him to be whipped 15 times. She also ordered that the sentence commence from Sept 10, 2020. 'The punishment is excessive,' said Justice Azman Abdullah, who led a three-member bench that allowed Alagesan's appeal against the sentence. Justices Zaini Mazlan and Azmi Ariffin also heard the appeal. Earlier, lawyer Mohtaruddin Baki submitted that Alagesan had pleaded guilty to the charge at the first instance when the matter came up for trial. Mohtaruddin, who once served as a Court of Appeal judge, said there should be a discount in the sentence as his client had saved the court and prosecution time and resources. 'Further, the crime was not premeditated,' he said, adding that Alagesan would be serving the productive years of his life behind bars. Deputy public prosecutor Soleha Noratikah Ismail urged the bench to maintain the sentence as the murder was brutal. 'The accused entered the living room and struck the victim, who was asleep, several times on the head with a hammer,' she said, adding that a clear message must be sent that foreigners must respect local laws. It is unclear why the accused and deceased were at the home. The case facts stated that a witness saw the accused committing the act and leaving the room. The owner of the home then contacted the police, who arrived minutes later and arrested the accused. A post-mortem showed that the deceased died from blunt trauma to the head. Since July 2023, judges have been given the discretion to impose a prison sentence or the death penalty for serious offences like murder and drug trafficking. Those convicted of murder may be jailed for between 30 and 40 years, while male offenders aged below 50 will also receive 12 to 24 strokes of the rotan.
South China Morning Post
2 days ago
- Politics
- South China Morning Post
Malaysia's top court to hear Anwar's immunity bid in sexual harassment case
The Court of Appeal on Monday ruled that proceedings must be postponed to allow Anwar to pursue a constitutional challenge over whether a sitting prime minister should be shielded from such lawsuits, particularly those related to events before he took office and might be politically motivated. Anwar is facing a civil suit filed by his former research aide, Muhammed Yusoff Rawther, who has accused him of sexual assault at his private residence in 2018, when he was the opposition leader. Anwar has denied the allegations. The trial was initially scheduled to begin in mid-June, but a three-member bench agreed it should be deferred to give Anwar sufficient time to seek clarification from the Federal Court on the scope of legal protections afforded to a serving prime minister. Anwar's lawyers have argued that the prime minister is 'simply asserting his right to raise constitutional questions of public importance' and is not attempting to avoid trial. The questions include whether a sitting prime minister should be granted protection from politically motivated suits aimed at undermining the government, and whether civil suits involving conduct before a leader taking office should be subject to safeguards.
Bloomberg
2 days ago
- Politics
- Bloomberg
Malaysian Court Pauses Sexual Assault Suit Against Premier Anwar
A Malaysian Court of Appeal granted Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's application to fully pause a civil lawsuit against him by a former aide who alleged he was sexually assaulted in 2018. A court panel comprised of three judges decided to stay proceedings of the trial in a unanimous decision Monday that was read out by Appeal Court Judge Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali.
