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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll