Plans for a third runway at Heathrow airport have been ruled illegal by the court of appeal because ministers did not adequately take into account the government’s commitments to tackle the climate crisis.
Join other savvy professionals just like you at CIHT. We are committed to fulfilling your professional development needs throughout your career
In August 2018 Plan B and Friends of the Earth began a legal challenge to the Government’s plans to expand Heathrow Airport. The challenge was on the grounds that the government failed to assess the plans against the Paris agreement. The High Court supported the Government’s position, so the case appealed to the Court of Appeal. On 27 February 2020, the Court of Appeal found in the favor of Plan B and Friends of the earth.
The Court of Appeal ruled that the policy to expand Heathrow was unlawful based on legal errors. Minsters failed to comply with legal duties to take into account the Paris agreement. The Court of Appeal accepted the submissions made by Friends of the Earth that:
The Court of Appeal has declared the adoption of the Airport National Policy Statement (ANPS), which granted Heathrow’s expansion, as unlawful and ceases to have any legal effect. This stands until such time as the government conducts a review to correct the legal errors identified by the Court in relation to climate. With the ANPS deemed unlawful, there will be no third runway at Heathrow as currently set out.
Further to this, The Court of Appeal also rejected the applications for permission to appeal made by 2 developers: Heathrow Airport Limited and Arora Holdings Limited. This means that the developers’ only option is to apply for permission to the Supreme Court. The Secretary of State is not challenging the decision.
The transport secretary, Grant Shapps, said: “Our manifesto makes clear any Heathrow expansion will be industry-led. Airport expansion is core to boosting global connectivity and levelling up across the UK. We also take seriously our commitment to the environment.”
The Court of Appeal decision sets a president of holding the UK government to account on their climate change policies and ensures that any new policies work towards them. The ruling puts the importance of climate change at the centre of government decision making and is the Court telling the government that they must do this.
The Court did not constrain its findings on the relevance of Paris, non-CO2 impacts and post-2050 climate impacts to decisions under the Planning Act. This could have wider implications for other big infrastructure projects that have climate implications such as major road building schemes. Following this judgment, Paris will need to be considered whenever a National Policy Statement is created or reviewed. This will be relevant to any large carbon-intensive infrastructure such as energy projects.
The Court of Appeal decision also has the potential to impact plans at a local level. Town and country planning projects could be impacted if there is a case that they climate impacts. The Court of Appeal is the second highest court in the UK judicial system siting under the Supreme Court. This means that the ruling of the Heathrow expansion case sets a president that bounds the lower courts. The ruling can be used by community groups and climate activists to challenge potentially climate damaging projects.
Sources: Plan B V Heathrow Expansion
Friends of the Earth- Ruling against Heathrow expansion – impacts and significance
The Paris agreement is an international treaty that commits those who have signed and ratified it to purse efforts to limit global warming temperature rises to 1.5 degrees, and keep world temperatures well below 2 degrees.
Join other savvy professionals just like you at CIHT. We are committed to fulfilling your professional development needs throughout your career
{{item.AuthorName}} {{item.AuthorName}} says on {{item.DateFormattedString}}: