In 2023, Greenpeace UK initiated legal proceedings against the development of the Jackdaw and Rosebank petroleum fields. Another environmental organization, Uplift UK, also took legal action against Rosebank. The cases concerning the two fields were heard together. The organizations contended that the permits were granted in breach of existing regulations, rendering them invalid. A Scottish court has recently upheld the claim, resulting in a production ban.
Lack of Environmental Impact Assessment Led to Invalidity
The decision of the Scottish Court of Session, Outer House was published on January 30th. The court declared the development and operation permits for Rosebank and Jackdaw invalid. This decision was based on the failure of the environmental impact assessments (EIAs) to consider the climate effects of burning the extracted oil and gas. The EIAs only dealt with the far smaller emissions that will occur in the production phase. The court concluded that this was contrary to UK legislation implementing the EU EIA Directive. Similar rules also apply to oil and gas projects in Norway.
Immediate and Absolute Production Ban
Because the permits are invalid, the operators have to reapply for permission to develop the fields – and this time meet the legal requirements. In the meantime, an immediate and absolute ban was placed on producing oil from the fields. In the court’s view, this was necessary to avoid undermining the purpose of the EIA rules – that the effects of a project must be assessed before the project can begin.
Among other things, the court emphasized that the companies were taking a risk by continuing development without waiting for legal clarification of whether the permits were valid. The companies’ interests could therefore not be a decisive argument against a production ban. On the other hand, weight had to be given to the public’s interest in public authorities acting lawfully, to the private interest of members of the public in being protected from climate change, and to the public’s right to effective participation in public decision-making processes.
In Line with Previous Decisions
The ruling follows the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Finch v. Surrey County Council, from June last year. In Finch, the UK Supreme Court confirmed that the EIA Directive, and therefore UK law, requires an EIA of combustion emissions before permission can be granted for an oil and/or gas project. The case concerned an onshore project, but the Court of Sessions affirms that the same applies to offshore projects.
Last year, Oslo District Court interpreted the same regulations in the same way, in a case brought by SVW on behalf of Greenpeace and Nature and Youth. In TOSL-2023-99330, the court ruled that the permits for the Yggdrasil, Tyrving and Breidablikk fields are invalid because they were granted in contravention of the Norwegian Petroleum Regulations, which also implement the EIA Directive. The UK Supreme Court endorsed this interpretation in Finch, paragraphs 169-173.
The Norwegian Supreme Court has referred Greenpeace and Nature and Youth’s appeal in the injunction case for oral hearing on March 18 and 19, 2025.
The decision from the Court of Session can be read here.