THE Daily Echo has covered each day of the public inquiry since it began on November 27 last year. You can see all our reports below.
Below are ten of the key claims made at the inquiry as the evidence unfolded.
November 29, 2001: New Forest East MP Dr Julian Lewis queried the expansion plan put forward by ABP, claiming the company intended to close its existing container terminal if the Dibden Bay scheme was approved.
December 4, 2001: Coastal planning specialist Martin Hendry said ABP needed a large area of vacant land next to a deep water channel and described Dibden Bay as one of the few suitable sites.
January 23, 2002: Paul Vickers, chairman of pressure group Residents Against Dibden Bay Port, said the UK would not need a new port facility for many years yet - when better sites than Dibden Bay could be on offer.
February 7, 2002: Port director Andrew Kent rejected claims that ABP could meet increasing demand by making better use of the existing docks.
April 18, 2002: Leading wildlife watchdog English Nature said ABP's plan for a new deep-sea dock on the edge of the New Forest would "finish" vital habitats for thousands of birds.
April 26, 2002: Ecology expert Philip Colebourn said ABP had fulfilled its obligations to replace habitat by drawing up plans which included a new creek and a "recharge" of the foreshore between Hythe and Cadland.
May 30, 2002: Bob Patterson, chairman of Shirley Sea Angling Club, said Southampton's sea anglers would be left with nowhere to fish if ABP was allowed to "destroy" a bass nursery area.
July 16, 2002: Landscape expert Martin Kelly described Dibden Bay as flat and featureless - and claimed that huge cranes lining the massive dock development would add "interest and vitality" to the estuary scene.
October 10, 2002: Acoustics specialist Rupert Thornely-Taylor admitted that the scheme had the potential to produce a significant amount of noise.
December 3, 2002: Residents against Dibden Bay Port said ABP would have to borrow £750m to finance the project.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article