Court Again
More judicial law-making?
POSTED ON 20 JUN 24
BY MARK HODGSONIN BBC, CLIMATE CHANGE, ENERGY, PLANNING, POLITICS, UNCATEGORIZED
The BBC headline sums it up: “Key oil project must count full climate impact – court”. The article commences dramatically:
The Supreme Court has ruled a local council should have considered the full climate impact of burning oil from new wells – a landmark decision which could put future UK oil and gas projects in question.
Under planning law the assumption has always been that only the impacts from constructing the wells and not the use of the final oil products should be considered.
The case brought against Surrey County Council by Sarah Finch, on behalf of campaigners could threaten new UK fossil fuels projects.
Is the hype justified? For those who would like to see the detailed reasoning, with a view to contemplating the implications for themselves, the Supreme Court decision can be found here. It seems that quite a few organisations decided the implications might be profound, since there were four interveners in the case: Friends of the Earth; Greenpeace UK; Office for Environmental Protection; and West Cumbria Mining Limited. By the way (as we learn from the judgment), the Office for Environmental Protection is a public body established under section 22 of the Environment Act 2021 and sponsored by the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Its principal objective is to contribute to environmental protection and the improvement of the natural environment.
What follows is my quick take on the decision and its significance.
https://cliscep.com/2024/06/20/court-again/
