Appeal court knocks back CPA’s Privy Council bid
(CNS): The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal has rejected an application by the Central Planning Authority to take the controversial ‘Boggy Sand Cabana’ case to the Privy Council. But the government v. government courtroom battle that pitched the CPA and the National Conservation Council against each other on the public purse’s dime is probably not over yet.
The CPA may well make a direct application to the court of last resort, though given the pending change in the government line-up, the authority may not need to.
The CPA has lost twice, once in the Grand Court and once in the appeal court, after it failed to follow a directive by the NCC to turn down an application to redevelop a cabana on the Boggy Sand Beach, even though the cabana is effectively now in the ocean as a result of the hard structures in the area and beach erosion.
However, these two legal losses may now become irrelevant in the face of a government reshuffle and the reported resignation of Wayne Panton as premier and minister for climate and sustainability.
With so few people in the PACT line-up that support or understand the need for environmental protection and ever-growing pressure from the development lobby, the next minister with responsibility for the NCC could put an end to the courtroom battles.
The case is supposed to revert back to the CPA, and the new minister could now ensure that the NCC no longer challenges the board if it approves the project again, despite the findings of the courts so far and the recommendations from the technical experts at the DoE.
In its ruling, the appeal court said it rejected the CPA’s application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council as there was no right of appeal. The court pointed out that, as a new application for planning permission will be needed and the cabana has since been demolished, the case is now academic.
“This internecine dispute has been resolved in a way which leaves both departments with a clear procedure to follow, and a procedure with gives both public authorities ample opportunity to make their views known, should they differ as to the planning merits. It is difficult to see why the further expenditure of public time and money is necessary,” the court stated on Wednesday.
The judges also pointed out that the CPA’s failure to consider section 41(4) and to give any cogent reason for disagreeing with the NCC were fatal to the appeal.
It their original appeal court ruling, the three senior justices made it clear that the NCC has the authority to direct government bodies when their actions could have an adverse effect on protected areas or species.
The cabana and sea wall at the heart of this project, which has become a poster child for the terrible, ad hoc planning decisions that have been made in the past, is in a protected marine park and is now submerged in the ocean for significant periods of the year.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: development, Local News, Marine Environment
Let us hope PPM and Mac never return to power, they both sell out to environment damaging development.
The best change would have been the appointment of a new minister. One with knowledge, experience and the ability to take wise counsel in protecting our fragile environment. Alas such change did not take place!
10:12 am but that change DID take place. Her name is Ms. Kathy Wilks !
Fake Ministry.
Great ruling!! Give it up CPA!!
If the members of the CPA want to keep pushing this, make them personally liable for the costs.
With the greedy visionless government the environment had no friends!
For the love of country, please give this up CPA.
We need a complete overhaul of the CPA. They keep pushing and pushing this project. It smells of dirty dealings xxxx. Why else would they keep trying to get it to pass? CPA as they currently stand are not fit for purpose. The DOE and NCC aren’t challenging this out of spite. This cabana will genuinely do a lot of damage to the marine and coastal environment. Why does the construction industry hold sway over the CPA? Utterly corrupt.
It is not necessarily this particular project but the principle of the matter that they are pushing. The CPA and development lobby cannot afford to lose this case because it means the Environment can actually trump development, which is their worst nightmare. If this sets a precedent, the CPA has to listen to the NCC going forward.
You do know those laws are now going to be changed, right?
In what world is environment trumping development a bad thing?
$$$$$$
DART
What absolute morons. Protect the environment. Once it is gone it is gone.
3:06 pm speaking of morons, your comment is moronic. Protect Caymanians. Once they’re gone, they’re gone.
A healthy environment helps protect Caymanians, if one goes so does the other. Without the environment where is caymanian culture? Cayman will just be another miamiand souless. Same goes for the environment with Caymanians who will protect it, who knows the reefs better or the mangroves.