header-logo header-logo

05 July 2007
Issue: 7280 / Categories: Legal News , Environment , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Utility companies not liable for contaminated land

Utility companies and their shareholders are not liable for certain environmental liabilities—including site clean-up costs—of their predecessor entities, the House of Lords has ruled.

In R (on the application of National Grid Gas plc (formerly Transco plc)) v Environment Agency, the law lords allowed an appeal by National Grid Gas (NGG)—formerly Transco—against a High Court decision that it should contribute towards the cost of cleaning up sites contaminated by former gas companies.

The Environment Agency’s claim that NGG was an “appropriate person” for the purposes of Pt 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990), and should therefore pay towards the remediation of a former public gasworks site, was rejected by the court.

CMS Cameron McKenna partner Paul Sheridan says the House of Lords has effectively ruled that when passing Pt 2A in 1995, the then Parliament did not intend that this retrospective liability would overreach the intent of the Parliament at the time of the British Gas and other privatisations.
“This will no doubt give rise to considerable academic and constitutional debate,” he adds.

In the ruling Lord Scott said: “I find it extraordinary and unacceptable that a public authority, a part of government, should seek to impose a liability on a private company, and thereby to reduce the value of the investment held by its shareholders, that falsifies the basis on which the original investors, the subscribers, were invited by government to subscribe for shares.”

Issue: 7280 / Categories: Legal News , Environment , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll