The hearing to refer the Judicial Review into the legality of co-mingled collections to the European Court of Justice will no longer be heard on 24 January, as scheduled, but will be adjourned until February 26-28, when the full case is heard.
CRR members, as claimants in a Judicial Review of The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2001, had made an application to the High Court in Cardiff for an early referral of the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
The Clerk at Cardiff Administrative Court confirmed that though the application has not been refused, it has been adjourned until February, when the case will be heard in full.
He said: “It has been adjourned to be heard with the substantive claim on the 26, 27 and 28 February 2013. We cannot give a statement on why it has come out of the list.”
Yesterday (17 January), Mr Justice Burton ordered the hearing (which would have taken place next Thursday) regarding the referral of the Judicial Review to the CJEU, to be vacated. The Judicial Review hearing will consequently take place at the High Court in Cardiff on 26-28th February as originally scheduled.
Due to the complexity of the issues, it is thought that Mr Justice Burton was not able to determine whether the case should be referred CJEU without the full merits of the case being set out first.
Mal Williams, Chair of CRR, commented: “We still think that there are reasonable grounds why this case will be referred to the European Court of Justice. [The] decision postpones adjudication of this issue by a few weeks until the start of the substantial hearing at the end of February.
“The Claimants in this case remain committed to high-quality recycling and to resolving this case at the High Court in Cardiff, via reference to the CJEU if required, as we believe is likely.”
Read more about the ongoing Judicial Review.
Get our weekly digest
resource.co article ai
How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?
There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.