A LEGAL showdown is looming between Oxford City Council and Network Rail after councillors demanded the firm used so-called ‘silent track’.

In the latest twist of a long-running saga, the council’s west area planning committee has refused the company’s request to lift requirements for rail damping on tracks through North Oxford.

Councillors say this is necessary to protect residents who fear faster and more frequent trains will disrupt their lives.

But the demand went against legal advice provided to the committee by planning officers and a QC the council hired, who said there was no case to do so.

They said the council had ‘no leverage’ over Network Rail, which claims the reduction in noise from ‘silent track’ would be so small that it is not ‘cost effective’. A representative on Tuesday night warned it would appeal against the decision.

Part of the disagreement stems from the fact silent track is untested in Britain, so there are no definitive estimates of how much it would reduce noise by.

But Bob Price, city council leader and a committee member, said: “The core issue here seems to what is reasonably practicable. It may improve people’s quality of life marginally and, if so, I think it is worth doing.”

Councillor Colin Cook compared the situation to ‘Alice in Wonderland’ after officers said it would make no difference if actual noise levels turned out to be higher than Network Rail had predicted.

He added: “The advice we have had seems to fly in the face of common sense.

“When new evidence comes forward, you should adjust your case based on that evidence.

“I want Network Rail to be held to account and for residents to have their day in court.”

But going into battle with the company would be a waste of taxpayers’ money, Councillor John Tanner warned.

He said: “Giving people their day in court is an empty gesture if they are going to lose.”

And Louise Upton, committee chairman, said: “I personally don’t want the council to have to pay for a public inquiry.”

Speaking after the meeting, a representative of Network Rail, who refused to give his name, said the firm had ‘no choice’ but to appeal against the decision.

He said: “We have spent £15m on noise mitigation that is above and beyond what is required. Now we have to waste more taxpayers’ money on a pointless exercise. I do not understand how councillors can make a decision like this.”

Dr Michael Drolet, of First Turn, said: “We are really pleased. We just want Network Rail to be held to account.”