Justices reject US presidential candidate’s legal challenge over 11-turbine project that will ‘spoil the view’ from his Scottish golf course
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0160-press-summary.pdf
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0160-judgment.pdf
Para 20.
A question remains as to why Parliament, when creating the new regulatory
regime in the 1989 Act, should have imposed duties in Schedule 9 on licence
holders and exempt persons in relation to the formulation of relevant proposals but
not on other applicants for a section 36 consent for relevant proposals.
The answer seems to be in the prior legislative history, in which earlier statutes imposed
similar duties on publicly owned electricity boards which generated electricity.
The 1989 Act preserved those duties by imposing them on persons authorised to generate electricity. Lord Malcolm in the First Division discussed this in paras 52 to 57 of his opinion, which I need not repeat in this judgment.
1 Comment