A LONG-RUNNING campaign to have the controversial project to build a domestic British High Speed line examined in court has succeeded.

Protestors have won their bid to have the HS2 plans subjected to the scrutiny of a judicial review, but supporters of the project are remaining confident that their case will stand up.

A High Court judge agreed on 26 July that the five cases affecting HS2 will all be heard, and set aside eight days for the hearings, which will start on 3 December.

Some costs will be capped, and there could be further claims to come.

The essential question which the court will examine is whether transport secretary Justine Greening acted lawfully when she approved HS2 in January this year. Part of the argument against her will rely on the fact that some responses to last year's consultation were not taken into account.

According to the HS2 Action Alliance, which is one of the four opposition parties involved, 'the secretary of state has been required to provide a full explanation for what happened'. Some of the claims from the various parties involved could change after her explanation has been given to the court.

The cases are being brought by the Alliance along with 51M, Heathrow Hub and Aylesbury Golf  Club. However, the stance of the objectors is not always the same. 51M is a group of local councils opposed to HS2 and urging upgrades of the existing network instead, while Heathrow Hub is  campaigning for the main High Speed line to run directly via the airport rather than further north.

The controversy has been fuelled still further by a lack of data from the Government about passenger numbers on the West Coast Main Line, but it is known that the route's intercity operator, Virgin Trains, is now carrying 30 million passengers annually -- twice as many as at the time of rail privatisation -- while Network Rail CEO David Higgins has warned that the line is being 'pounded' by heavy traffic, both passenger and freight.

If current trends continue, the WCML could run out of capacity at its southern end long before the first section of HS2 between London and Birmingham is due to open in 2026. Supporters of HS2 have argued that a further upgrade is neither feasible nor the answer to longer-term needs, and that a new line must be built. Building such a line for conventional speeds would only reduce its costs by some 10 per cent, while lengthening journey times.

Hilary Wharf, director of the HS2 Action Alliance, said "We are very pleased. Not only does the Judge agree our cases should be, and will be heard, but the Secretary of State has been forced to account for her actions in seemingly ignoring many consultation responses.

“The fact that three of the four claimants in this case have had their consultation responses mishandled is unbelievable. But it does explain why the Government seemed not to be listening, - because they weren’t. We were pleased that the judge will allow us to amend our case to reflect these developments. The Government should stop hiding behind its lawyers and release the capacity data which is so fundamental to their case for HS2.”

But campaigners in favour of the project remain undaunted. A source close to the campaigning group Yes to High Speed Rail told Railnews: “The Government were very anxious about conducting the consultation fairly and legitimately and, as a result, spent a great deal of time and money making sure the consultation was carried out correctly. Inevitably, some mistakes were made. The misplacing of over 400 submissions was definitely unfortunate. But overall we have no reason to believe that opponents have a real case against the Government on the grounds of the way the consultation was conducted.”