HS2 compensation scheme ruled 'unlawful'

[dutchman]

The High Court today ruled the compensation scheme for HS2 was 'unlawful' in the only one of five judicial reviews to succeed.



The government’s HS2 high-speed rail scheme suffered a setback when Mr Justice Ouseley ruled that the consultation process for compensating those affected by the £32billion project "was so unfair as to be unlawful".

The decision was a victory for the High Speed 2 Action Alliance (HS2AA), consisting of more than 70 affiliated action groups and residents’ associations including throughout Warwickshire.

The HS2AA case on consultation was one of five separate cases brought to block the controversial scheme in its current form.

He identified 10 grounds raised in the five cases brought by HS2’s opponents. He rejected nine out of 10 of the grounds, which included attacks on the manner in which the project had been steered through Parliament and alleged breaches of EU environmental and habitat directives.

The 10th - and only successful - challenge was HS2AA’s claim that the consultation and decision-making process on compensation was "fundamentally unfair".

David Wolfe QC, appearing for HS2AA, said tens of thousands of people who "just happen to live and own properties" along the high-speed route faced loss of value on their homes and being unable to move or remortgage for 15 years or more.

Mr Wolfe told the judge that 172,000 affected households had been contacted. Householders faced inadequate compensation and the prospect of unfairly being made to suffer because of the claimed public interest in HS2 going ahead.

He said the consultation process was flawed because of "lack of detail" and insufficient information on the options for a discretionary compensation scheme.

Allowing the HS2AA challenge, Mr Justice Ouseley ruled: "Although the overall decision is not irrational, the carefully reasoned and substantial HS2AA consultation response addressing the consultation issues as framed by the Secretary of State cannot have been conscientiously considered.

"All in all, the consultation on compensation was so unfair as to be unlawful."

The Judge said that the Department for Transport "bizarrely" opted for a compensation scheme which received just 21 consultation responses in its favour, out of 36,036 public responses.

The judge stressed that it was not his task to review the merits of HS2 itself, but to consider whether the decisions setting it up were legally flawed.

The first phase of HS2 would see a high-speed railway line running from London through Warwickshire and along the western edge of Coventry to a new station near the NEC.

One of the reviews was brought by the 51m alliance of 18 local authorities, which is challenging the legal basis of HS2 - arguing councils had not been given enough information about the full route.

The 51m group includes Coventry City Council, Warwickshire County Council, Warwick District Council, North Warwickshire Borough Council and Stratford District Council.

Despite being part of the 51m group, Coventry City Council was one of three councils to opt out of contributing towards its legal fund.

The 51m alliance provided witness statements from rail consultants who argued cheaper alternatives to HS2 had not been properly considered.

The HS2 Action Alliance - made up of action groups along the route - took up two of the judicial reviews over the HS2 compensation package and whether environmental considerations were properly taken into account.

The High Court also heard challenges from the Heathrow Hub group and from Aylesbury Golf Club in Buckinghamshire.

Hundreds of homes in Warwickshire within 1km of the first phase are reported to be affected by "a generalised blight" since the proposals were announced.

Campaigners had hoped the legal challenges could potentially delay the scheme for years. The decisions are almost certain to be taken to the Court of Appeal.

The Department for Transport insists today’s verdicts leave the way clear to take the plan to parliament with the deposit of a hybrid bill by the end of the year.

[dutchman]

Action groups call for compensation rethink.

The HS2 Action Alliance incorporates action groups across Warwickshire including in Burton Green, Kenilworth, Cubbington, Berkswell and Balsall Common.

HS2AA director Hilary Wharf demanded a more generous ‘property bond’ compensation scheme for homeowners.

She said: "Today’s judgement is a huge victory for the hundreds of thousands of people whose lives are blighted by HS2.

"The government’s shabby attempt to railroad through an inadequate compensation scheme whilst ignoring the views of ordinary people have been judged to be unlawful.

"The government must now go back to the drawing board and rethink its approach to compensation. There are many better compensation alternatives which would help all those up and down the country trapped by HS2.

"A market-based property bond scheme reflects private sector best practice and has been supported by the Council of Mortgage Lenders, the British Bankers Association and the National Association of Estate Agents.

"Implementing such a scheme would give confidence to the property market whilst at the same time shift the remaining cost of property blight away from ordinary people.

"If the events of the last 12 months weren’t enough here is a legal decision which further confirms that the DfT are not fit for purpose.

"We must thank the thousands of people across the country often only able to afford modest donations which helped fund these legal cases. Without them we could never have won today."

In response to the compensation verdict the DfT released a statement which said: "The judge has not commented on the merits of particular property compensation schemes and he has not said the government should introduce a property bond."

A second judicial review by HS2AA in to whether environmental considerations were properly taken in to account by the DfT failed but they have vowed to appeal.