Environmental activists win landmark ruling over UK oil well plan (updated)
20/06/2024 10:46
(Adds Friends of the Earth, judge comment)
By Michael Holden
LONDON, June 20 (Reuters) -
The UK's highest court ruled on Thursday that planners must
look at the impact of emissions on global warming before
granting approval for oil wells, in a landmark case that climate
activists said makes it easier to block fossil fuel projects.
Environmental campaigners had argued that planning
permission to retain and expand an oil well site near London's
Gatwick Airport was flawed, because it had not considered the
impact of greenhouse gas emissions from the use of the oil.
Supreme Court judges agreed by a narrow three to two
majority, quashing the planning approval, which they said was
unlawful.
"It is not disputed that these emissions, which can easily
be quantified, will have a significant impact on climate," said
George Leggatt, one of the three Supreme Court justices who
agreed with the appeal.
"The only issue is whether the combustion emissions are
effects of the project at all. It seems to me plain that they
are."
Campaigners said the landmark judgment would make it much
harder for new oil, gas and coal developments to get approval,
and other controversial schemes would be impacted.
"This historic ruling is a watershed moment in the fight to
stop further fossil fuel extraction projects in the UK and make
the emissions cuts needed to meet crucial climate targets,"
Friends of the Earth lawyer Katie de Kauwe said. "It is a huge
boost to everyone involved in resisting fossil fuel projects."
The government's Department for Energy Security and Net
Zero did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the
ruling.
The case concerned a decision in 2019 by Surrey County
Council to allow Horse Hill Developments, part-owned by British
energy company UK Oil & Gas Plc, to retain two oil wells and
drill four more over the courts of more than 20 years, near the
town of Horley, close to London's Gatwick Airport.
An Environmental Impact Assessment for the project examined
the effect of the construction, production and decommissioning
of the site, but did not assess the impact from emissions that
would result from the use of the oil.
The Weald Action Group (WAG), an umbrella organisation for
local groups that campaign against the extraction of oil and gas
in southeast England, estimated this would equate to more than
10 million tonnes of carbon emissions.
A campaigner acting for WAG launched a legal challenge
against the planning approval, but this was rejected both by the
High Court in London and then by the Court of Appeal.
In his Supreme Court judgment, Leggatt said combustion
emissions from the refined oil were inevitable.
"The reasons accepted by the council for excluding the
combustion emissions from consideration and assessing only
direct GHG emissions from within the well site boundary are
therefore demonstrably flawed," he said.
(Reporting by Michael Holden; editing by William James and
Peter Graff)
((michael.holden@thomsonreuters.com;))