Environmental protection – Waste on land – Knowingly permitting controlled waste to be deposited on land – Restoration costs. Court of Session: Dismissing an action in which the pursuer, who had leased a site to two directors of a waste management company who subsequently pled guilty to a charge of keeping controlled waste at the site in a manner likely to cause pollution of the environment and harm to human health, sought to impose liability on the defenders, one of about 38 third-party users of the company's services, for the whole restoration costs in relation to the site, averring that in March 2011 they entered into an arrangement with the company for the disposal of their waste, which subsisted until they ceased to deliver waste to the site in June 2012, the court held that the pursuer had failed to aver a relevant case that the defenders 'knowingly permitted' unlawful deposits of waste on the site, and in any event his case was largely extinguished by the operation of prescription.