Government’s Climate Action Plan Is Unlawful, Rules High Court

The Royal Courts of Justice building, which houses the High Court of England and Wales, in London on Feb. 3, 2017. Daniel Leal/AFP via Getty Images

The government’s climate plan is unlawful because the net zero minister had approved it without having enough evidence to consider whether policies to reduce carbon emissions could be delivered, the High Court has ruled.

On Friday, Mr. Justice Sheldon sided with the Good Law Project and environmental charities Friends of the Earth and ClientEarth, stating that Grant Shapps’s decision to approve the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan (CBDP) was “simply not justified by the evidence.”

The judge said the then-secretary of state for net zero “could not evaluate for himself” which policies could be delivered or which would fail based on the information provided. Mr. Justice Sheldon called the details of the draft plan “vague and unquantified” and said they did not provide Mr. Shapps with “sufficient” information on whether the CBDP should be approved.

Mr. Justice Sheldon said, “If, as I have found, the secretary of state did make his decision on the assumption that each of the proposals and policies would be delivered in full, then the secretary of state’s decision was taken on the basis of a mistaken understanding of the true factual position.”

Lawyers for the government argued that Mr. Shapps—during his time as head of Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s (DESNZ)—had “sufficient information” which “rationally supported” his decision to approve the CBDP.

The CBDP remains government policy and DESNZ’s current secretary of state, Claire Coutinho, will publish a new report within 12 months in response to the High Court ruling.

Risk Tables Had Not Been Scrutinised

The CBDP was approved in March 2023 and outlines how the UK will achieve environmental milestones for the sixth carbon budget, which runs until 2037, as the UK heads towards a target of net zero emissions by 2050.

In February of this year, Friends of the Earth, ClientEarth, and the Good Law Project argued at the High Court hearing that Mr. Shapps had no, or inaccurate, information about risks related to enacting the strategies and whether they could deliver the emissions targets by the deadlines.

The plans had included a “misleading summary,” the group claimed. David Wolfe, KC, representing Friends of the Earth, told the court that some “risk tables,” which show the risks associated with enacting proposals, have been “recast” to remove information about whether plans could be enacted.

The court had heard that these tables had not been shared with the public, parliament, or climate organisations, meaning that they had not been scrutinised.

Second High Court Victory

Friday’s ruling was the group’s second High Court victory against the government over climate policies, after a different judge ruled in 2022 that the Net Zero Strategy was unlawful because ministers had not been sufficiently briefed on how policies would help the UK meet carbon emissions targets.

Friends of the Earth lawyer Katie de Kauwe said after Friday’s ruling: “It shows the strength of the Climate Change Act— brought into force after a successful campaign led by Friends of the Earth and the backing of an overwhelming majority of MPs—to hold the Government of the day to account for meeting its legal requirements to cut emissions.

“We urgently need a credible and lawful new action plan that puts our climate goals back on track and ensures we all benefit from a fair transition to a sustainable future. Meeting our domestic and international carbon reduction targets must be a top priority for whichever party wins the next general election.”

A spokesperson for DESNZ said: “The claims in this case were largely about process and the judgment contains no criticism of the detailed plans we have in place. We do not believe a court case about process represents the best way of driving progress towards our shared goal of reaching net zero.”

Legal Challenge to Rishi Sunak’s Target Rollbacks

The challenges by Friends of the Earth, ClientEarth, and the Good Law Project are not the only action the government is facing over its climate targets.

In December, BBC presenter and environmentalist Chris Packham said he would launch a High Court challenge against the government after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak rolled back targets on heat pumps and new electric car sales from 2030 to 2035. Mr. Sunak made the decision in September 2023 in response to rising consumer costs.

BBC presenter and environmentalist Chris Packham has sent a legal challenge to the prime minister over his decision to delay the phase-out of new gas boilers and petrol and diesel cars in London on Oct 4, 2023. Jonathan Brady/PA Wire

Mr. Packham, represented by law firm Leigh Day, applied for a judicial review of the government’s decision, claiming that Mr. Sunak was “acting illegally” in changing the policy. He added that it contravened the UK’s commitments under the Climate Change Act, which says the government must be clear on how it will meet its carbon budget plans.

The BBC presenter argued that the emissions reductions from the vehicle and gas boiler policies were “intrinsically important to the UK’s ability to reach somewhere near its net zero commitments.”

He said: “They should not have been changed without proper process and consultation. I believe that action was unlawful.”

A DESNZ spokesperson said at the time that it strongly rejected the claims “and will be robustly defending this challenge.”

According to Leigh Day, the High Court hearing will take place later this year.

PA Media and Owen Evans contributed to this report.