A landmark ruling by the UK’s Supreme Court said that a local council should have considered the full climate impact of burning oil from new wells – rather than restricting its assumptions to the impact of their construction.

That means that future proposals for oil and gas projects will need to take account of how the final products of their output will impact the environment. In his ruling, Lord Leggatt said it was “inevitable” that oil from the site will be burned, and the resulting greenhouse emissions were “straightforwardly results of the project” which should be considered.

Surry County Council

The case was brought against Surry County Council by Sarah Finch acting on behalf of Weald Action Group.The six wells at Horse Hill are expected to produce 3.3 million tonnes of crude oil over the next 20 years. Burning that oil would produce over 10 million tonnes of CO2, according to Friends of the Earth.

Lawyers acting for Ms Finch said that as part of the environmental impact assessment the council should have considered not just the greenhouse gas emissions from building the wells but also burning any oil that was then used – known as downstream emissions, according to the BBC.

Goals unlawful

The ruling comes only a few weeks after the UK High Court held that the government’s plans for hitting climate goals were unlawful. Activists had argued that the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan, which was published in March 2023, relied too heavily on future technologies and did not fully consider the risks that it targets may not be met.

In his judgement, Mr Justice Sheldon said: “It is not possible to ascertain from the materials presented to the Secretary of State which of the proposals and policies would not be delivered at all, or in full,” the BBC said. The government would have to submit its proposals again with better figures, but that process has been halted by a general election due to be held on 4 July.