BBCWildlife campaigners have won a legal case against a national park authority in a bid to quash planning permission for an outdoor adventure centre.
Adventure Beyond, which offers coasteering and kayaking trips from Ceibwr Bay in Pembrokeshire, was constructing a centre in Moylegrove.
Wild Justice said the centre would lead to an increase in activities in nearby Ceibwr Bay, which is part of the Cardigan Bay Special Area of Conservation (SAC), the Pembrokeshire Marine SAC, and a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).
Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority said it would “carefully review the judgment before determining any further actions.
Adventure Beyond has been asked to comment.
The judgement follows a two day hearing held in Havefordwest by Mrs Justice Eyre in April.
She found that the review, brought by Wild Justice against Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority, should be granted on two grounds.
The decision means that the planning permission granted has been quashed, and the development will have to be reconsidered if it is to go ahead.
The group was opposed to the new centre because of the potential for the disturbance of wildlife in a protected site.
The cliffs at Ceibwr are home to razorbills, guillemots, fulmars, choughs, kestrels and herring gulls.
Mrs Justice Eyre found that the national park authority’s decision to grant planning permission in October 2024 was unlawful on the basis that a survey of breeding birds published by Natural Resources Wales had not been made fully available to the committee before approval was given.
The judge also agreed that the management committee had not been properly informed about the impact of the development on the Aberarth-Carreg Wylan SSSI, including the potential for coasteering activities to disturb the chough- a species of bird for which the SSSI is designated.
Wild Justice have described the decision as a “victory for local residents”.
A spokesperson for Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority said it acknowledged the judgement.
“The court found against the national park authority on two procedural grounds, three grounds were dismissed. Judicial Review challenges do not consider the merits of a planning decision itself, but rather the process by which a decision was reached.
They added the park “respected” the decision and would “carefully review the judgement in detail before determining any further actions that are required”.
