New oil and gas projects will be more difficult, campaigners said today, following a landmark win at the Supreme Court.
A majority judgement this morning concluded that planning approval for oil production at Horse Hill in Surrey was unlawful and should be quashed.
Surrey County Council should have taken into account the carbon emissions from the use of the oil, as well as the production process, the judgement said.
It could have implications for future fossil fuel developments and projects that are subject to similar legal challenges.
Sarah Finch, who has challenged the Horse Hill decision through the courts for five years, told cheering supporters outside the Supreme Court:
“We won!”
She said she was “absolutely over the moon to have won this important case”.
She said Weald Action Group and the legal teams behind the challenge had “made the future safer”.
“Weald Action Group has always believed it was wrong to allow oil production without assessing its full climate impacts, and the Supreme Court has shown we were right.
“This is a massive vindication of what we’ve been saying. It is a huge victory for Horse Hill. The residents there are not going to have to face the tanker traffic, the noise, the air pollution, the light pollution from the big development that was planned at Horse Hill. That permission is quashed.
“But it is not just Horse Hill. It means in future that every fossil fuel development of the size to need an environmental impact assessment will have to assess the emissions from the fuel when it is burnt. That is now clarified. That is the law.
“That is going to make it a lot harder for anyone to open a new oil field or coal mine and it has implications for projects that have already been agreed but are under legal challenges.”
Ms Finch said this could include similar challenges to the Cumbrian coalmine, the Rosebank and Jackdaw fields in the North Sea and the onshore oil production project at Biscathorpe, in Lincolnshire.
She said:
“We have just seen a tipping point. No longer will any planning authority be allowed to wave through fossil fuel production without fully assessing the climate impact.
“This is a welcome step towards a safer, fairer future. The oil and gas companies may act like business-as-usual is still an option, but it will be very hard for planning authorities to permit new fossil fuel developments – in the Weald, the North Sea or anywhere else – when their true climate impact is clear for all to see.”
She told DrillOrDrop:
“I always had hope that we would win and that our argument was right. But that didn’t mean that I thought that judges would accept them.”
She had taken the challenge to the High Court and Court of Appeal before last year’s hearing at the Supreme Court.
“I became more optimistic at the Supreme Court hearing. It was clear that the judges were listening really attentively and were thinking about all the issues.”
Ms Finch said today’s decision did not mean the end of fossil production. But she said:
“It does mean that any new fossil fuel applications will need a proper environmental impact assessment that takes account of all of the climate emissions. There will be other voices that will say that this should be offset against benefits, such as energy security. So those applications still need to be fought, one by one, as they come up.”
Lorraine Inglis, co-founder of Weald Action Group, said:
“Words cannot describe how overjoyed we are at this result.
“It is a huge win for us and our climate. We have been campaigning against this oil site for over 10 years and what began as a legal challenge against Horse Hill has developed into something much bigger, highlighting the flaws in the current Environmental Impact Assessment process.
“This decision not only impacts Horse Hill but also the future of UK fossil fuel development. The Weald Action Group is incredibly grateful to Sarah for stepping forward and representing this case.”
Sarah Finch was represented by the law firm, Leigh Day. Solicitor Rowan Smith, said:
“Make no mistake. This is truly a momentous day for the people of the Surrey Hills, the people of the planet and the success of climate litigation around the world.”
He said the majority judgement had established that there was no principle that if environmental harm was exported it could be ignored.
“Climate change is a global problem because there is no correlation between where greenhouse gases are released and where climate change is felt. Wherever greenhouse gas emissions occur they contribute to global warming.”
Mr Smith said a key part of the court’s conclusion was that decisions on the impact of fossil fuel projects could be decided only after “proper public involvement and in the full knowledge of the environmental cost”.
“Crucially, the Court recognised that climate change is a global problem and that the damaging impact of emissions on the climate is not limited to where they originate. This truly historic judgment has very significant implications for the future assessment of fossil fuel projects and a number of cases currently before the Courts.”
Friends of the Earth intervened in the case. Its lawyer, Katie de Kauwe said:
“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. It is a huge boost to everyone involved in resisting fossil fuel projects.
“Gas, oil and coal companies have been fighting tooth and nail to avoid having to account for all the climate-harming emissions their developments cause. Now, the highest court in the country has ruled that planning permission for an oil project was granted unlawfully because there was no consideration of its full climate impact.
“This judgment will make it harder for new fossil fuel projects to go ahead. They can no longer claim that downstream emissions are someone else’s problem. Now, when fossil fuel companies apply for planning permission, it follows from the Supreme Court’s judgment, that the end-use emissions must be considered by the planning authority.
“This is a stunning victory for Sarah Finch and the Weald Action Group, after nearly 5 years of grit and determination, in going to court year after year against adversaries with far greater financial resources than they have. Despite setbacks in the lower courts, they never gave up. Friends of the Earth is incredibly proud to have supported Sarah and this groundbreaking challenge through all its legal stages.”
Tessa Khan, of the climate campaign group, Uplift, said:
“Today’s decision by the Supreme Court in the Finch case is genuinely historic. It marks a turning point towards more sensible planning-related decision-making in the UK, and crucially towards a safer climate.”
Lauren MacDonald, of Stop Rosebank, the group opposing plans to develop the Rosebank field in the North Sea, said:
“This decision is a huge step forward in ending our dependence on the toxic fossil fuels that are driving climate breakdown. We are thrilled that Sarah, and all those campaigning against drilling at Horse Hill, have secured this historic victory.
“There is no room for more oil and gas extraction if we want to stay within liveable climate limits. This common sense decision from the Supreme Court hopefully means that the days of approving oil fields without accounting for their emissions are behind us.
“If Horse Hill is rightfully considered unlawful – all new oil and gas projects should be too. This includes the enormous Rosebank oil field off the coast of Shetland which we are also challenging in the courts.”
Cllr Jonathan Essex, a member of Surrey County Council, said:
“We now have clarity on decisions about the supply of fossil fuels. We need equal clarity on planning decisions that increase the demand for fossil fuels. This was about the Gatwick Gusher at Horse Hill. Now we need the same kind of common sense applied to Gatwick Airport and its expansion plans.”
Sue Taylor, of Frack Free Balcombe Residents’ Association, who is challenging a well test in the West Sussex village of Balcombe, said:
“It is a triumph for Sarah and everyone who has worked so hard for so long to ensure that all the consequences of oil production are considered in the planning process.
“Overturning planning permission which would have enormously expanded the site at Horse Hill for 20 years is a massive victory.
“Horse Hill well site is only nine miles from the village of Balcombe where Frack Free Balcombe has been fighting oil exploration since 2013 when there was the summer of protests.
“Our legal battle to stop oil exploration in Balcombe will be heard in the Court of Appeal later this year. We are massively encouraged by this result and are so very grateful to Sarah, her lawyers and supporters who have fought to get this great result.”
The government’s environmental watchdog, the Office of Environmental Protection (OEP), intervened in the challenge. This was the first time it had intervened in a court case. In a statement the OEP said:
“The OEP intervened in this case before the Supreme Court. We did so to seek legal clarity and to make submissions on the interpretation of the law in this area. We did not take sides between the parties on the particular facts of this case.
“This was the first time the OEP has intervened in a court case. We are pleased that by doing so we were able to be of assistance to the Supreme Court. We note that the judges state, in their majority judgment, that they “found particularly helpful [the] submissions made by the Office for Environmental Protection”.
DrillOrDrop has closed the comments section on this and future articles. We are doing this because of the risk of liability for copyright infringement in comments. We still want to hear about your reaction to DrillOrDrop articles. You can contact us by clicking here.
DRILL OR DROP? 