Updated: Heathrow Third Runway Slammed by High Court

Posted by davewalsh - 26 March 2010 at 12:47pm - Comments

Campaigners leave the High Court victorious this morning after the result of a judicial review into the planned third runway at Heathrow declared that the plans were 'untenable'.

UPDATED 20 April 2010: Fantastic news! Both the climate and common sense have scored a major victory at the High Court today, where the Government's plans for a 3rd runway at Heathrow have been dealt a huge blow.

In response to a legal challenge against the runway mounted  by a coalition of organisations that include Greenpeace, Lord Justice Carnwath ruled that the Government's decision to give a green light to the proposed third runway does not hold any weight. He said that their claims to the contrary as ‘untenable in law and common sense'.

The judge delivered a slap across the wrist to the Government, saying that the decision hadn't properly taken into consideration the Government's own climate change policy or the economic case and surface transport. Effectively this means that for the runway to go ahead, the Government will have to re-consult on these major issues as part of an overhaul of its wider aviation policy.

While the Government has been sent back to drawing board, it is very hard to see how it can resuscitate any enthusiasm for the new runway. However, we will be keeping a very close eye on the situation, and we won't rest until the any new government has scrapped the plans categorically and permanently.


Update 20th April:

This morning in the Royal Courts of Justice, Lord Justice Carnwath ordered the Department for Transport to pay their own costs plus 60% of the costs incurred by the claimants in the Heathrow Judicial Review, a coalition of environmental groups, local residents and West London councils, who, he said, had “substantially won”.

Lord Adonis, the Minister for Transport, was forced to sign the following undertaking, described by the judge as “a major concession”:

"The Secretary of State undertakes not to rely on section 12(1) of the 2008 planning act in connection with the adoption of the airports national policy statement."

This means that the government cannot use their 2003 white paper or the 2009 decision (which was determined in court not to actually be a decision after all) as part of their new national policy statement, which will have to take greater consideration of climate change, the carbon cost of expansion, and surface access. Essentially, whilst we’ve all known for a while that the government’s aviation policy was no more, today was the day Adonis signed its death certificate.

If there was one person who didn’t realise that the policy was dead before today, it was Lord Adonis himself, who on the 26th of March stated “I welcome this ruling” and continued:

Today’s judgment marks no change whatsoever in the policy on Heathrow. The process that was in place before this judgment is exactly the same process as will take place after this judgment."

Lord Adonis did not claim that the government’s aviation policy was merely sleeping, nor did he say, like Monty Python's Dead Parrot, that it merely was pining for the fjords. However, he must be stunned by today's ruling.

We're many steps closer to winning, but we need your help to keep up the pressure until we get an outright win. Over 81,000 people have already become beneficial owners of Airplot - the piece of land in the heart of the land claimed by the Government for Heathrow's expansion. You too can become an owner, along with your family and friends. Join the Plot now!, before the deeds are finalised on May 1st.

That was a good result! Well done! Makes the campaigning we did worthwhile, again.

How come the government is still saying that it will go ahead?

Are they insane?!

The time and the effort you have put into this story/issue is WORTHLESS.
As ever the government will lean on the judiciary and ride roughshod over this ruling. This runway WILL be built, you have no say in that and the amount of carbon expended for this campaign makes it therefore pointless.
Did you honestly think we live in a democracy? A country where your voice counts? You are living a hoax, you have no voice and mark my words sooner or later this runway will be built.
Why? because the earth's population is growing and where there is demand for air travel there must be supply.
Do you see the population growing? Do you see what was once countryside has become developed? Do you see your peers becoming parents and grandparents?
THAT is why it will be built
As long as we keep procreating, the more airports will expand and the more money they will make out of us.
The longer Greenpeace stays silent on overpopulation, the more useless their other concerns become.
Look for population concerns on this website, what? there aren't any pages?
Making little carbon feet massively increases your carbon footprint, so can all those Greanpeace activists with say, three children or more please leave now and go play at something else?
Brutal words I know but its just a foretaste of what is to come in future when we look back in two hundred years time at our own stupidity for dumbing down the issues we dont want to hear.

Wowser a pretty aggressive post....But I would agree on the point of overpopulation. I think it is the most serious threat to our species. It only exacerbates all existing problems and will give us a million more. Other species regulate their population to prevent such a disaster, humans are obviously too selfish to do so. I think it's time we brought in some kind of limit to how many children 1 family can produce-Like China. Isn't 1 child enough? Of course many will say no. But we're facing catastrophe. Not only that, but in an economic crisis who can afford it? Massive cost to civilisation and your wallet!
I too would like to see an educational campaign on the dangers of over-population. People need to take responsibility. I for one will not be having any children. For one thing there are millions of homeless children/babies up for adoption out there-do we really need to add any more of our own? It's selfish of people to breed their pets when there are millions of cats and dogs being put to sleep in shelters everyday...Can we not wake up and see that it's just as selfish to keep adding child after child to the world?

That was a good result! Well done! Makes the campaigning we did worthwhile, again. How come the government is still saying that it will go ahead? Are they insane?!

The time and the effort you have put into this story/issue is WORTHLESS. As ever the government will lean on the judiciary and ride roughshod over this ruling. This runway WILL be built, you have no say in that and the amount of carbon expended for this campaign makes it therefore pointless. Did you honestly think we live in a democracy? A country where your voice counts? You are living a hoax, you have no voice and mark my words sooner or later this runway will be built. Why? because the earth's population is growing and where there is demand for air travel there must be supply. Do you see the population growing? Do you see what was once countryside has become developed? Do you see your peers becoming parents and grandparents? THAT is why it will be built As long as we keep procreating, the more airports will expand and the more money they will make out of us. The longer Greenpeace stays silent on overpopulation, the more useless their other concerns become. Look for population concerns on this website, what? there aren't any pages? Making little carbon feet massively increases your carbon footprint, so can all those Greanpeace activists with say, three children or more please leave now and go play at something else? Brutal words I know but its just a foretaste of what is to come in future when we look back in two hundred years time at our own stupidity for dumbing down the issues we dont want to hear.

Wowser a pretty aggressive post....But I would agree on the point of overpopulation. I think it is the most serious threat to our species. It only exacerbates all existing problems and will give us a million more. Other species regulate their population to prevent such a disaster, humans are obviously too selfish to do so. I think it's time we brought in some kind of limit to how many children 1 family can produce-Like China. Isn't 1 child enough? Of course many will say no. But we're facing catastrophe. Not only that, but in an economic crisis who can afford it? Massive cost to civilisation and your wallet! I too would like to see an educational campaign on the dangers of over-population. People need to take responsibility. I for one will not be having any children. For one thing there are millions of homeless children/babies up for adoption out there-do we really need to add any more of our own? It's selfish of people to breed their pets when there are millions of cats and dogs being put to sleep in shelters everyday...Can we not wake up and see that it's just as selfish to keep adding child after child to the world?

Follow Greenpeace UK