The High Court has disappointed campaigners who have objected to the HS2 scheme after the majority of their objections were thrown out.

The judge presiding over last year’s five Judicial Reviews ruled in favour of the government in nine out of 10 areas of dispute (see below for full details).

Transport Minister Simon Burns said: “ The judge has categorically given the green light for the government to press ahead without delay in building a high speed railway from London to Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.

“The judgement ensures that nothing now stands in the way of taking our plans to parliament. We will now move forward as planned with the crucial business of getting the scheme ready for construction in 2017.”

Justice Ouseley dismissed claims that the 2011 consultation on HS2 strategy and the route between London and Birmingham (Phase 1) was unfair and unlawful. Rerunning this consultation could have delayed the HS2 project significantly.

The only challenge that was upheld related to the way the consultation on compensation measures for those property owners affected had been carried out.

James Del Mar, Heads of Knight Frank’s HS2 team, said: “Not only has the court thrown out most of the arguments against HS2, but the one objection it has ruled in favour of means that we now face more uncertainty over what compensation people will be entitled over to.”

Judicial Review challenges rejected:

Dismissed challenges to the fairness and lawfulness of the 2011 consultation on HS2 strategy and the phase one route
Rejected challenges that the government was required to comply with the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive
Dismissed challenges that the government failed to comply with the Habitats Directive
Dismissed the challenge that the hybrid bill process could not comply with the Environmental Assessment Directive
Dismissed the challenge that the government is required to present the environmental impacts of the entire Y network to Parliament alongside the phase one bill
Dismissed challenges that the government has failed to comply with the Public Sector Equality Duty
Dismissed challenges that the Secretary of State’s decisions on Euston, the HS1 link, and the Heathrow spur were irrational
Dismissed the challenge that the Secretary of State has fettered his discretion, and predetermined the outcome of future aviation strategy
Dismissed the challenge that the government failed to properly consider the proposed route alternative submitted by the Aylesbury Park Golf Club claimants in response to the 2011 consultation

Judicial Review challenge upheld:

Upheld the challenge that the consultation process was unfair, because not enough information was provided to consultees and the criteria by which compensation options were considered were not adequately explained - he also found that the government had not fully considered HS2 Action Alliance’s detailed consultation response on compensation.