Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Read more
An ocean conservation charity has lost a High Court challenge against the Government over nearly 30 oil and gas licences granted last year.
Oceana UK brought legal action against the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), saying they had not properly assessed the impact of climate change and accidental spills when granting the licences.
DESNZ and the NSTA said the licences are only for exploration and that further assessments will be carried out before final consent to extract is given, and that its approach is lawful.
On Friday, Mr Justice Mould dismissed the claim, ruling that the 28 licences for oil and gas exploration are lawful.
In his written judgment, Mr Justice Mould said: “The evidence before the court establishes that licensed oil and gas activities in the United Kingdom continental shelf carry with them the risk of accidents, including oil and chemical spills and, at least in principle, of a major polluting or contaminating event.
“Oil spills and chemical discharges do occur.”
He added that it was nevertheless reasonable for the body, which carried out the assessments, and DESNZ to “approach the task of appropriate assessment on the basis that accidental events, including spills, are ‘not part of the work plan’”.
Mr Justice Mould continued: “The approach to assessment of that risk was properly precautionary.”
At a hearing in March, Zoe Leventhal KC, for Oceana, told the court in London that many of the 28 licences awarded in May last year overlap with protected zones in three areas – west of the Shetlands, the North Sea and the Irish Sea.
She told the court that harbour porpoises, puffins and pink-footed geese are among the species which could be affected.
Rose Grogan, for DESNZ and the NSTA, said in written submissions that Oceana was taking a “scattergun approach” to its legal challenge.
She said expert advice was “considered in detail” and “legitimate disagreements were reached”, and asked the court to dismiss Oceana’s claim.
Hugo Tagholm, executive director of Oceana UK, said: “Legally, the government’s decision to grant these licences stands, but morally, it will never be right.”
He added: “The government must make clear – as it did in court – that ‘honouring’ existing oil and gas licences does not guarantee that future consents for production will be granted.
“We need to honour a safe and stable planet for future generations, not yet more profits for big oil.”
Oceana UK said it is now taking legal advice on next steps, including on whether it can appeal against the decision.