東涌富東邨六旬婦人透過司法覆核，挑戰港珠澳大橋工程環境影響評估報告，以及環保署批准工程上馬而簽發的環境許可證，昨獲判勝訴。高等法院裁定報告有「甩漏」，沒有獨立分析現時附近環境的空氣質素，然後與工程或會對空氣質素造成的影響作對比，下令推翻環保署的決定。有立法會議員認為政府若要重新做一份環評報告，或多或少會阻延工程進度及令造價上升。
2. High Court's decision HCAL 9 /2010
The Justice, Joseph Fok, hold that the applicant is correct in her contention on issue 1, namely that the absence of a stand alone analysis in the EIA Reports means that they do not comply with the TM and SBs.The applicant’s case is that baseline conditions without the projects in place were not presented in the EIA Reports.
The Director of EPD could not lawfully approve the EIA Reports under s.8 of the EIAO or grant the environmental permits in respect of the Boundary Crossing Facilities and Link Road projects under s.10 of the EIAO: Shiu Wing Steel at §29
The leading counsel submitted that the failure to present a separate (i.e. stand-alone) analysis of the projected environmental conditions without the projects in place is in breach of the following provisions of the TM, namely sections 4.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.3.1(c), section 4.4.2(g) and Annex 20 §4. In respect of the residual impact and mitigation, he referred to TM section 4.3.1(d) and to SB clause 2.1(v).
3.Court of Appeal CACV84/2011
4. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 173/2009 and 172/2009
