header-logo header-logo

16 December 2020
Categories: Legal News , Aviation , Climate change litigation
printer mail-detail

Heathrow expansion lawful, Justices rule

Government policy supporting a third runway at Heathrow is lawful, the Supreme Court has held

The court unanimously overturned the Court of Appeal’s decision in February, which found the government had failed to take account of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, which the UK ratified in 2016. The Paris Agreement enshrines an aspiration to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions during the second half of the 21st century.

The decision, in R (Friends of the Earth & Ors) v Heathrow Airport [2020] UKSC 52, means Heathrow can now proceed to seek planning permission.

However, the judgment notes that ‘since the designation of the Airports National Policy Strategy, the statutory target has been made more stringent. The figure of 100% was substituted for 80% in s 1 of the Climate Change Act 2008 by the Climate Change Act 2008 (2050 Target Amendment) Order 2019/1056’.

Will Rundle, head of legal at Friends of the Earth, said: ‘This judgment is no “green light” for expansion.

‘It makes clear that full climate considerations remain to be addressed and resolved at the planning stage. Heathrow expansion remains very far from certain and we now look forward to stopping the third runway in the planning arena.

‘With ever stronger climate policy commitments that Heathrow must meet, it remains unlikely it will ever get planning permission for the third runway.’

Rowan Smith, solicitor at Leigh Day, which acted for Friends of the Earth, said: ‘Given those obligations and targets have become much more challenging since the Airports National Policy Strategy was designated and are only expected to get tougher, especially in light of the advice by the Committee on Climate Change that, in order to meet Net Zero Target, there should be no net increase in airport capacity, this judgment represents a huge advancement in our client’s continuing battle against the third runway and the climate catastrophe facing the world.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll