Press Releases - ABLE

COMPANY SET TO APPEAL OVER ‘SHIPS’ RULING
15/12/03

The Managing Director of Able UK has described a High Court ruling today (December 15th) on its planning permission for the TERRC (Teesside Environmental Reclamation and Recycling) facility at Graythorp as ‘very difficult to understand—and very frustrating’

Mr Peter Stephenson was speaking after Mr Justice Sullivan had allowed a judicial review against Hartlepool Borough Council brought by three local residents who claimed that the planning permission for Able to recycle ‘marine structures’ did not cover ships.

The Council, supported by Able, argued that the term ‘marine structures’ included in the planning permission did include ships—including the four redundant US vessels currently berthed at the facility—and Mr Stephenson said this afternoon that, although they would have to study the detailed judgement, they intended to seek leave to appeal.

He also revealed that the suggestion to include the term ‘marine structures’ had been put forward by the Teesside Development Corporation when it originally gave planning approval for the TERRC facility—and he warned that the delays created as a result of recent legal cases meant that the chance of bringing a £165million construction contract to Graythorp had been lost.

Said Mr Stephenson “I obviously respect the judge’s ruling, but I have to say that I am sure I will not be alone in finding it hard to understand how it can be argued that the term ‘marine structures’ included in the planning permission for our facility apparently does not include what most people would regard as the most basic of marine structures—in other words ships. What I also find especially difficult to come to terms with is that the Graythorp facility was first developed to build ships—and ships have been built, repaired and dismantled there for over 50 years.

“The Council obviously took the view that the wording of the planning permission was perfectly appropriate for us to undertake the work on the US vessels and what is especially frustrating is that, when we first opened the facility, we discussed the matter with the then planning authority, the Teesside Development Corporation, who specifically advised that including the term ‘marine structures’ was the best and most comprehensive term to use.

“We will obviously have to study Mr Justice Sullivan’s detailed ruling when it is made available On Thursday—as I imagine will the Council—but we will be seeking leaving to appeal on Thursday.

“I am sure that there will be those who will claim that the ruling is a ‘victory’ for the three local residents who brought the judicial review against the Council. I suspect that many more people--especially those who know that our area has the skills and expertise to undertake this kind of work and want to see much-needed jobs being created—who will take a very different view.

“The reality is that the activities of those organisations and individuals who have attempted to frustrate our contract for the US vessels are likely to have a very high price. We had been very hopeful of gaining a £165million contract for a major offshore construction project, with work scheduled to start towards the end of next year. The inevitable delays we now face in completing the work on the US vessels means that hopes of gaining that contract have been lost…and I am sure that local people will reach their own conclusions as to who is responsible for that sad state of affairs.”

<< back