CAMPAIGNERS against plans to redevelop Basildon Golf Course claim a hidden report into the amount of protected wildlife on the site will be the ace card in a legal challenge.

Yesterday an emergency Court of Appeal hearing agreed an environmental study, which has just come to light and was commissioned by Basildon Council, should be allowed to be submitted as evidence by Friends of Basildon Golf Course in a future hearing.

Basildon Council made no mention of the report during a previous challenge by the campaign group at the High Court last year, despite it showing the course could support protected species, including bats, great crested newts and badgers.

The council argued yesterday the new evidence was inadmissable, but Lord Justice Sullivan ruled there should be a full hearing to look at the implications of the study.

Campaigners are challenging council-approved plans granted in September 2007 for Jack Barker Ltd to develop a new club house and driving range and recontour the course using thousands of tons of building rubble.

The environmental report, carried out for the council in July 2006, showed the green belt course was also an ideal habitat for several species of nesting birds and reptiles.

It found the course included a badger sett and many areas of the course provided habitat for large colonies of protected great crested newts. Mick Toomer, chairman of Friends of Basildon Golf Course, said: “The council spent thousands of pounds of ratepayers’ money on a 40-page ecological assessment, and when it looked like derailing its scheme, it buried it.

“Then it denied its existence.”

The High Court rejected the friends group’s case early this year, but it was granted an appeal on a technicality.

Yesterday campaigners successfully argued the High Court had not been able to take the survey into account when it first threw out their case.

In a witness statement to the court, John Toplis, of the friends group, said: “Since lodging the application for permission to appeal, new relevant information has come to light, which would have been likely to make a material difference to the findings.”

Paul Ilett, council spokesman, said: “We are awaiting confirmation from the court of the result and will consider this information once we have it.”