ARTICLE AD BOX
Planning permission for a national Holocaust memorial outside Parliament has been quashed by the High Court.
Campaigners successfully challenged the government after it overturned a decision by Westminster Council to refuse permission for the monument.
The London Historic Parks and Gardens Trust described the process to approve permission as "flawed".
The charity, which launched the case, argued the project was the "right idea, wrong place".
It opposed the UK Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre being built in Victoria Tower Gardens, a small triangular Grade II-listed green space next to Westminster Abbey and the Palace of Westminster.
Westminster City Council had refused to grant planning permission in November 2019 but it was granted in July last year, following a public inquiry and recommendations of a planning inspector.
The memorial, which was due to open in 2024, aimed to be a place for national remembrance of the six million Jewish people murdered in the Holocaust, as well as the millions of other victims of Nazi persecution.
It was set to include 23 bronze fins and an underground learning centre.
Former Prime Minister David Cameron announced plans for the memorial in 2016 but disagreements over its meaning, public safety and potential harm to parkland have followed the project.
'Enable further consideration'
A number of other high-profile organisations and individuals also objected to the planned site, including former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams.
The trust's lawyer, Richard Drabble QC, argued it did not comply with a 1900 legal act affecting park land, which contains "a prohibition on using Victoria Tower Gardens as anything other than a garden open to the public".
In a ruling issued on Friday, Mrs Justice Thornton said the case against the planning permission decision succeeded in relation to 1900 legal act.
The judge said the act "imposes an enduring obligation" to retain land "as a public garden and integral part of the existing Victoria Tower Gardens".
"Accordingly, the appropriate remedy is to quash the decision, so as to enable further consideration of the implications of the London County Council (Improvements) Act 1900 for the proposed scheme," she concluded.
Campaigners claimed the planned site risked affecting the park "irrevocably", as well as raising concerns over alleged impact on trees, potential flooding, and other monuments.
At a hearing in February, London Historic Parks and Gardens Trust argued there was an "unlawful" approach taken to considering other sites for the memorial.
It also highlighted the possible impact the development could have on the heritage setting, including the Buxton Memorial commemorating the abolition of slavery.
Lawyers represented the government argued that there was "no error of law" in the decision-making process and policy was not "misinterpreted or misapplied".