header-logo header-logo

13 August 2009
Issue: 7382 / Categories: Legal News , Environment
printer mail-detail

Friends of the earth?

An attempt to claim the government failed to implement its fuel poverty strategy has failed in the Court of Appeal.

 An attempt to claim the government failed to implement its fuel poverty strategy has failed in the Court of Appeal.

In Friends of the Earth and Ors v Secretary of State for Energy [2009] EWCA Civ 810, the charity claimed the government had a duty to meet its targets on eradicating fuel poverty whatever the cost.

The government said it faced budgetary constraints because of rising fuel prices.

The Warm Homes and Energy Conservation Act 2000 requires that government strategy must “specify a target date for achieving the objective of ensuring that as far as reasonably practicable persons…do not live in fuel poverty”.

Much of the debate before the court centred on whether the phrase, “as far as reasonably practicable”, implied a duty on the part of the government to try to reach, or to achieve, targets.

In his judgment, Lord Justice Kay said: “Until recently, one would not have expected legislation to impose upon central government a model which defines the route from policy,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll