Greetings, CaseSnappy readers! We return with another insightful instalment of our Decoding Judgements series. Today's case for examination is Friends of the Earth Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors [2024] EWHC 2349 (Admin), a recent noteworthy decision in coal mining and the broader environmental law landscape.
This case concerns the permission granted by the Secretary of State to West Cumbria Mining Limited for a new underground coal mine in Whitehaven, Cumbria in December 2022. Predicted to extract over 60 Mt of metallurgical coal from 2025 to 2049, none were more vocal in their objections than Friends of the Earth and South Lakeland Action on Climate Change (SLACC). These environmental groups raised issues with the inevitable greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions linked to the project, with their worries culminating in a request for judicial review.
Friends of the Earth and SLACC protested the Secretary of State's decision, alleging a failure to consider the GHG emissions resulting from coal combustion and their significant impact on climate change. The defence from West Cumbria Mining Limited held that such emissions were either insignificant indirect effects or neutral due to equivalent emissions from US coal as a substitute. At first, the Secretary of State had backed this substitution argument; however, they later conceded, agreeing to the decision's quashing.
The court decided to quash the Secretary of State's decision for approving the planning permission. Presiding judge Mr Justice Holgate held that the Secretary of State had not adequately assessed the GHG emissions from the coal's local and global end-use, further erring in relying on arguments of imperfect substitution.
‘Taking into account the common ground that the burning of the Whitehaven coal is an inevitable consequence of its extraction from the mine, in my judgment it is plain, following the decision of the Supreme Court in Finch, that the GHG emissions from that combustion are significant likely indirect effects of the project the subject of the planning application’, stated Mr Justice Holgate. ‘The Secretary of State failed to deal in any way with the claimants' alternative case that a positive precedent effect of a net zero mine leading to other similar projects would depend upon further offsetting arrangements; that would be undesirable because offsets are a finite resource. Neither the Inspector nor the Secretary of State tackled this substantial point under Issue (iii), because of their reliance upon the net zero mine approach.’
Friends of the Earth Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Ors [2024] EWHC 2349 (Admin) provides a pivotal judgement on balancing environmental considerations within administrative law. It encapsulates the crucial need to evaluate environmental impacts, such as GHG emissions, even when evaluating permissible economic enterprises.
Stay tuned to our Decoding Judgements series for the breakdown of other intriguing cases in the legal landscape! As always, you can sign up to CaseSnappy for free and continue your enriching legal knowledge journey!