Judges to decide in battle over £20m Fareham - Gosport Bus Rapid Transit scheme (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Judges to decide in battle over £20m Fareham - Gosport Bus Rapid Transit scheme
7:58am Wednesday 28th July 2010 in
-
- By Simon Carr » Eastleigh Chief Reporter
A BATTLE over a controversial £20m bus route is set to be fought out in the highest court in the land.
The fate of the proposed rapid bus transit between Fareham and Gosport could be in the hands of five Supreme Court judges.
It comes after resident Viv Morge, 58, who lives near the planned development and has called for work to be halted ahead of the new legal challenge, won the right to appeal.
She previously got injunctions to delay work on the Bus Rapid Transit scheme (BRT) when she took the case to the High Court and then the Court of Appeal.
However, her application to stop work on the development was refused and the court dismissed two of the three grounds on which she asked for leave to appeal.
Her solicitor Graeme Swain said: “The case will now be heard in the Supreme Court and could yet be referred to the European Court.”
The case involves complex arguments about what is meant by disturbance of habitats for protected species and how that relates to the European directives.
Mrs Morge, of Wych Lane, Gosport, has raised concerns about sleeping lizards and hungry bats in her fight to stop the work that will involve ripping up the derelict railway lines.
Hampshire County Council’s Executive Member for Environment and Chairman of Transport for South Hampshire, Mel Kendal, said: “We welcome the court’s decision not to grant an injunction and are very pleased that we can now effectively go ahead with building the BRT scheme.
“Although the judges have allowed the third ground of appeal, this is really in order to clarify a point of law for the future rather than any inherent problem with the BRT planning consent.
“This will have no direct impact on progress with the work.”
Comments(12)
Condor Man
says...
8:58am Wed 28 Jul 10
Duncan Disorderly
says...
9:12am Wed 28 Jul 10
Stillness
says...
9:33am Wed 28 Jul 10
Duncan Disorderly wrote:I think she has a bat in her belfry. She is totally consumed with stooping this from going ahead. She has no interest in bats (apart from herself). Guess where she lives, yep, Funtley, next to the old railway line.
I hope that woman is paying for the case to go to the Supreme Court. If she's the only one objecting, the taxpayer shouldn't have to cough up.
SotonNorth
says...
9:43am Wed 28 Jul 10
Whitters
says...
11:49am Wed 28 Jul 10
Anyway Duncan. No its all being done on Legal Aid. This is what, the third? fourth attempt? It is big news on her solicitors website with links to both of today's articles.
We taxpayers are funding her lavish junkets court-spotting.....
StEmmosfire
says...
11:56am Wed 28 Jul 10
soton1980
says...
12:28pm Wed 28 Jul 10
.
Common sense dictates that it is far easier for a commuter to be tempted to ditch their car if there is a direct train to where they want to go. Having to change at Fareham for a rail or bus connection just complicates things and I wonder how many people will bother.
Stillness
says...
12:57pm Wed 28 Jul 10
StEmmosfire wrote:Makes it a bit awkward with trams going both ways don’t you think?
I think a small 1 track tram system alongside a purpose built cycle path and pedestrian walkway will work much better.
StEmmosfire
says...
2:08pm Wed 28 Jul 10
Stillness wrote:why do you even bother commenting? All you ever do is quote other people and make absolutely no contribution to any debate or discussion. Did it ever occur to that all they would need is 1 tram running. If they needed more running all they would need to do is have a passing place.
StEmmosfire wrote: I think a small 1 track tram system alongside a purpose built cycle path and pedestrian walkway will work much better.Makes it a bit awkward with trams going both ways don’t you think?
Stillness
says...
4:10pm Wed 28 Jul 10
StEmmosfire wrote:Passing place? Oh a second track then, where one tram could wait. Well that should speed things up I guess. Perhaps they could lay the second track on your purpose built cycle path.
Stillness wrote:why do you even bother commenting? All you ever do is quote other people and make absolutely no contribution to any debate or discussion. Did it ever occur to that all they would need is 1 tram running. If they needed more running all they would need to do is have a passing place.
StEmmosfire wrote: I think a small 1 track tram system alongside a purpose built cycle path and pedestrian walkway will work much better.Makes it a bit awkward with trams going both ways don’t you think?
Whitters
says...
5:39pm Wed 28 Jul 10
We all know that there is not enough money to substantiate (sorry for the big word) changing the bus scheme to a tram scheme now that Viv Morge and Whatshisface Swain have had their share of the Legal Aid payments and HCC costs.
What we need to know is how are the bats getting to the Supreme Court so that they can petition in person (or in bat, or something).
Now stop being so far off topic that fall into third place behind The News and Goat-Dating Monthly.....
More News stories
- Chris Huhne resigns but insists: "I'm innocent"
- Charlie is a big bundle of joy
- Snake owner thrust python at firefighter
- Redknapp jury told to keep their eye on the ball
- Primary teacher is charged with rape
- Free Titanic museum tickets for city residents
- Liverpool to launch turnaround cruises within months, leader claims
- Councillor quits days before disqualification
- Win tickets to see Le Tiss on tour
- Inquest opened into body on the beach
The old railway track at Military Road and below an artists impression of how it could look
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Zeo says...
8:20am Wed 28 Jul 10