What is really going on in politics? Get our daily email briefing straight to your inbox Sign up Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

Campaigners trying to block Heathrow expansion have lost a High Court challenge against controversial plans for a third runway.

Environmental groups and local boroughs have complained about the impact a new runway would have on air quality, climate change and noise levels.

Judges gave their ruling following separate judicial reviews of the Government's decision to approve the plans, brought by a group of councils, residents, environmental charities and Mayor of London Sadiq Khan .

During a two-week hearing in March, they argued the plans would effectively create a "new airport" with the capacity of Gatwick and have "severe" consequences for Londoners.

But their cases were dismissed by two leading judges on Wednesday.

Lord Justice Hickinbottom, sitting with Mr Justice Holgate, said in the ruling: "We understand that these claims involve underlying issues upon which the parties - and indeed many members of the public - hold strong and sincere views.

"There was a tendency for the substance of the parties' positions to take more of a centre stage than perhaps it should have done, in a hearing that was only concerned with the legality, and not the merits, of the Airports National Policy Statement."

Lawyers for some of the claimants argued at a hearing in March that the plans would effectively create a "new airport" with the capacity of Gatwick and have "severe" consequences for Londoners.

Outlining the case on behalf of five London boroughs, Greenpeace and Mr Khan, Nigel Pleming QC said the plans could see the number of passengers using the airport rise to an estimated 132 million, an increase of 60%.

(Image: NEIL HALL/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock)

The case was brought against Transport Secretary Chris Grayling by local authorities and residents in London affected by the expansion and charities including Greenpeace, Friends Of The Earth and Plan B..

The ruling comes hours before Jeremy Corbyn urges MPs to do their "historic duty" and declare the world's first "climate emergency".

He will tell MPs they should listen to those “who bear the highest cost” and are “least to blame here and around the world for the destruction of our climate”

(Image: SWNS)

Tim Crosland, Director of Plan B and a legal adviser to Extinction Rebellion, said the group plan to appeal the court's decision.

He said following the ruling: “This is a disappointing judgement by the Court, but it is increasingly difficult to see how the Government’s reckless plans to expand Heathrow Airport can proceed. Following the recent Extinction Rebellion protests there is widespread recognition that we are in a state of climate and ecological emergency."

John Stewart, chair of HACAN which gives a voice to residents impacted by Heathrow, said: "This ruling removes a significant hurdle in Heathrow's bid to get a third runway but campaigners have vowed that they will continue their fight to stop expansion at the airport."

John Sauven, Executive Director of Greenpeace UK responded to the ruling, saying: "Chris Grayling has won a court case over whether the third runway is legally permissible, but he’s lost the argument over whether it's morally justifiable.

"This verdict will not reduce the impact on local communities from increased noise and air pollution, nor will it resolve Heathrow Ltd’s financial difficulties or the economic weakness in their expansion plans.

"But our main concern is allowing Heathrow, the UK’s biggest carbon emitter, to expand in the middle of a climate emergency.

"For as long as climate change remains an afterthought in government decisions they are kicking our children in the teeth.

"Our children’s future, not the aviation industry’s expansion, should be our nation’s number one priority. Until it is, our commitment to opposing this disastrous scheme through every avenue available will continue.”

Will Rundle, Friends of the Earth’s Head of Legal, said: “On a day when parliament is being asked to declare a climate emergency and just before the independent Committee on Climate Change is expected to advise the government to tighten its belt on climate-wrecking emissions, this decision feels completely out of step with the real world around us.

“Heathrow airport is already the single biggest climate polluter in the UK, expansion will only exacerbate the problem. Parliament’s decision to green-light Heathrow was morally wrong, but today we believe the courts have got it legally wrong too. We are examining the judgement in detail and will consider all options including the possibility of appealing.

“The climate case against the third runway is growing stronger every day and Heathrow bosses face many more major hurdles before they can bring in the bulldozers. This fight will go on, the issue is just too big to drop.”

The campaigners claimed the Government's National Policy Statement (NPS) setting out its support for the project fails to properly deal with the impact on air quality, climate change, noise and congestion.

Friends Of The Earth and Plan B argued Mr Grayling failed to take enough account of the impact on air quality when reaching the decision to approve the third runway.

(Image: PA)

Lawyers representing Mr Grayling said the claimants' case was "unarguable" and "premature", as they will all have the opportunity to make representations at a later stage in the planning process.

Support from Labour MPs helped push through the proposals to expand Europe's busiest airport with an overwhelming majority of 296 in a Commons vote in June last year.

Tory MPs were whipped to support the government but then Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who was a leading opponent of expansion, missed the vote because he was in Afghanistan.

But fellow Tory Greg Hands resigned as a trade minister to vote against the government.

He said today: "I am disappointed that this decision represents a further green light to Heathrow expansion,. I resigned from the Government over the Third Runway, and this decision will be a disappointment to my Chelsea and Fulham constituents."

Former cabinet minister Justine Greening, who represents Putney, said the result was "hugely disappointing".

But she added: "This will be a Pyrrhic victory for Heathrow and the government, when the various undeliverable environment, transport and operational commitments unravel, with taxpayers picking up the bill."

While Zac Goldsmith, who stood against the Tories as an independent over the runway but later rejoined the party to become the Tory MP for Richmond, said: "This legal verdict is hugely disappointing but it doesn't change the facts: a third runway would be disastrous for noise and air pollution, is incompatible with the need to cut carbon emissions and Heathrow's financial case doesn't stack up. At some point, the Government has to face up to these facts."

He vowed: "This fight is very far from over."

Labour's official position was to oppose expansion, but its MPs were given a free vote.

Speaking after the ruling, shadow chancellor John McDonnell, whose Hayes and Harlington constituency contains the airport, said the decision let the Government "off the hook".

Mr McDonnell said: "What I find extraordinary in the judgment is that, on the issues with regard to climate change, the Government gets off the hook simply because it has not adopted the Paris Agreement into UK law.

"So, even though our belief is that it (Heathrow expansion) completely undermines the ability to abide by the climate change targets of the Paris Agreement, because the Paris Agreement is not in UK law as yet the Government gets off the hook."

Mr Grayling said at the time that the new runway would set a "clear path to our future as a global nation in the post-Brexit world".

Construction could begin in 2021, with the third runway operational by 2026.

Responding to the decision, Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable said that proceeding with the scheme was "one of the Conservative government's worst mistakes."

Mr Cable, who represents Twickenham in south west London, said: “It is a pity that the judicial review process has ended in this way, but the fundamental environmental and economic issues remain. Expanding Heathrow is the wrong decision for the country and for South West London, where air pollution, air traffic noise, and congestion are already a blight.



“With climate change looming large in the public mind, I still believe that the expansion will be revisited before a single brick is laid.



“The economics of the project look increasingly questionable. This company pays little tax and ships out its profits to its overseas owner. They expect to raise unrealistically large sums for the runway and the infrastructure around the airport.