How many times has [2011] Env. L.R. 26 been cited?

[2011] Env. L.R. 26 is cited by 3 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2011] Env. L.R. 26

· cited by 3 · influence score 13/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

[2011] Env. L.R. 26

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 3

Cited — R. (on the application of Sarah Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group) v Surrey County Council 2022-02-17
“…ly used (see, for example, the judgment of the CJEU in Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest v Vlaams Gewest (The Brussels Airport Co. NV intervening) (Case C-275/09) [2011] Env. L.R. 26, at paragraph 29; the judgment of Lord Sumption in R. (on the application of Buckinghamshire County Council) v Secretary of State for Transport [2014] UKSC 3;[…”
Cited — The Queen (on the application of Rights: Community: Action) v The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government 2021-12-20
“…he words that are used (see the judgment of the CJEU in Brussels Hoofstedwlijk Gewest v Vlaams Gewest (The Brussels Airport Co. NV intervening) (Case C-275/09) [2011] Env. L.R. 26, at paragraph 29, and the judgment ofLord Neuberger of Abbotsbury and Lord Mancein Buckinghamshire County Council, at paragraphs 170 and 171). One should assum…”
Cited — Preston New Road Action Group v Secretary of State for Communities & Anor 2018-01-12
“…ernment and the Regions (Case C-201/02) [2004] Env. L.R. 27, at paragraphs 51 to 53, and 62, and Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest v Vlaams Gewest (Case C-275/09) [2011] Env. L.R. 26, at paragraph 33). That is the argument on issue (2). And thirdly, Mr Willers submitted, the Secretary of State’s approach was inconsistent in that he had take…”