Campaigners back in court in bid to halt road near Stonehenge
The Department for Transport is defending the appeal
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Campaigners bidding to halt the building of a road near Stonehenge have begun their latest legal challenge at the Court of Appeal.
Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site (SSWHS) previously brought a challenge over proposals to build a two-mile tunnel near the Salisbury landmark to overhaul eight miles of the A303 from Amesbury to Berwick Down in Wiltshire.
In a ruling earlier this year, Mr Justice Holgate dismissed the campaigners’ bid to overturn that decision, finding most parts of their case “unarguable”.
SSWHS are now bringing an appeal against this decision at the Court of Appeal in London.
In written submissions for the group, David Wolfe KC said the approval for the development in July 2023 by Huw Merriman, then Minister of State for Rail and HS2, breached a duty to act fairly.
He told the Court of Appeal that the then-minister wrongly gave no consideration to the “risk of Stonehenge being delisted” as a World Heritage Site.
He also failed to take the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan and the Net Zero Growth Plan into his deliberations, Mr Wolfe said.
Mr Wolfe continued in written submissions: “(Mr Merriman)’s approach to environmental impact assessment was unlawful in relation to the cumulative effect of greenhouse gas emissions from the development consent scheme and other committed road schemes.”
The Department for Transport is defending the appeal.
James Strachan KC, for the department, said in written submissions that Mr Merriman “was not provided with any” summary of representations from SSWHS “nor even with a summary of National Highways’ position” on the site’s preferred route.
Mr Merriman “was provided with no further advice on this issue” of harm to Stonehenge, Mr Strachan added.
The barrister continued: “It was irrational not to specify the assets and consider the level of harm where the minister was purportedly comparing the heritage impacts of two schemes.“
Previously, the National Highways’ plan was quashed by the High Court in July 2021, due to concerns about the environmental impact on the site.
However, two years later the tunnel was approved by the Department for Transport.
National Highways has previously said its plan for the tunnel will remove the sight and sound of traffic passing the site and cut journey times.
The hearing before Sir Keith Lindblom, Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Stuart-Smith is expected to conclude on Tuesday with a decision expected in writing at a later date.