BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Bancoult, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs [2012] EWHC 2115 (Admin) (25 July 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/2115.html Cite as: [2012] EWHC 2115 (Admin) |
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
The Queen on the application of Louis Olivier Bancoult |
Claimant |
|
- and - |
||
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs |
Defendant |
____________________
Steven Kovats QC (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendant
Hearing dates: 4 July 2012
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Stanley Burnton:
The application
The claim
The evidence
"7. …Roberts … asserted that establishing a marine park would, in effect, put paid to resettlement claims of the archipelago's former residents …"
"My objective was to reassure the US so that they did not oppose the MPA. The questioning, and much of the talking, came from the US side. The primary US concern was military security, and it was in this context that they raised the question of whether an MPA would prevent resettlement, that is both legal and illegal resettlement.
… I would have had no reason to say at the 12 May 2009 meeting anything to the effect that the MPA was motivated by a desire to prevent resettlement. That was not the UK position at any time, …."
The contentions of the parties
Discussion