The Court of Appeal has turned down Protect Dunsfold’s bid to reverse a Government decision allowing gas exploration in the Surrey Hills.

A Government Minister may have flip-flopped on carbon emissions, but that wasn’t enough for the Court of Appeal, who have refused Protect Dunsfold the chance to challenge a gas exploration scheme in the Surrey Hills.

We’ve been supporting local campaigners as they’ve fought to stop drilling rigs rolling through their village, causing irreparable damage to businesses, landscapes and wildlife.

Protect Dunsfold wanted to argue that the Government’s decision to approve a project to drill on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is unlawful because of a key inconsistency.

In July 2022, Stuart Andrew MP, who was serving as Minister for Housing, rejected a fossil fuel scheme in Ellesmere Port because of its projected greenhouse gas emissions. The Climate Change Committee concluded in 2019 that in tackling the climate crisis “every tonne of carbon counts”.

But on the same day he rejected the scheme in Ellesmere Port, the Minister gave the green light to the project in Dunsfold, even though it is expected to generate an even greater amount of carbon dioxide.

Despite this glaring mismatch, the court has blocked Protect Dunsfold’s appeal. It ruled that the Ellesmere Port decision was sufficiently different and there was therefore no obligation for the Secretary of State to take it into account.

This is another kick in the teeth after Rishi Sunak’s backsliding on climate commitments and the fossil fuel bonanza he’s unleashed in the North Sea. The Tory Government is also facing a backlash from some of its own MPs over its proposed Oil and Gas Licensing Bill.

We are very grateful for the support we received to back Protect Dunsfold’s legal challenge. But a further appeal in this case is not possible.

In spite of this hugely disappointing ruling, Good Law Project will continue to fight for our climate. It’s more important than ever that reckless gas and oil drilling is stopped in its tracks. We’ve teamed up with Friends of the Earth and ClientEarth to take the Government to the High Court next month over its threadbare strategy to reach net zero.

We’re supporting Protect Dunsfold as they appeal a High Court judgment which upheld the Government’s decision to allow drilling for gas in the Surrey Hills.

The climate emergency is causing devastation across our planet. Wildfires have swept across southern Europe, floods have engulfed China and July was the world’s hottest month on record.

The Government’s response is nothing short of perverse. Ministers are rowing back on green policies and unleashing a tidal wave of new licenses to drill for oil and gas in the North Sea. Rishi Sunak and his Cabinet are wilfully ignoring the stark advice from experts that if our planet is to survive, fossil fuels must stay in the ground.

Last year, the former Minister of State for Housing, Stuart Andrew MP, overruled Surrey County Council to give the green light to a scheme from UK Oil and Gas. This plan would see drilling rigs roll through the village of Dunsfold to look for gas in fields on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

We believe this decision is not only scandalous, but unlawful. If the drilling goes ahead, it would do irreversible damage to local wildlife and businesses and be yet another dent in our efforts to reach net zero.

That’s why we have been supporting local campaigners Protect Dunsfold to fight this plan.

The High Court ruled against the challenge last month, and the judge did not grant permission to appeal against her decision, but we’re not giving up. Protect Dunsfold is now applying to the Court of Appeal to overturn this ruling.

On the same day in July 2022 that the Minister of State approved the scheme in Surrey, he rejected a similar project in Ellesmere Port, because of its greenhouse gas emissions and the Climate Change Committee’s finding that every tonne of carbon contributes to the climate crisis. But if drilling goes ahead in Surrey, it would produce greater emissions than the rejected plan at Ellesmere Port.

Protect Dunsfold argue that the Minister of State’s decision to approve the plan in Surrey disagrees with a critical aspect of the decision at Ellesmere Port, making them inconsistent. They also argue that the High Court gave too much weight to the fact that emissions were not considered in Surrey County Council’s original planning decisions and gave no reasons why the Minister of State could ignore emissions when considering the scheme in Surrey.

Success in this appeal could have positive impacts far beyond the village of Dunsfold. With our Government failing to address the climate emergency, this appeal could make it much harder for fossil fuel schemes to go ahead.

But we need your help. Any support you can give this appeal, no matter how big or how small, would be greatly appreciated.

We are incredibly disappointed that the High Court has ruled against a legal challenge we are supporting to force the Government to reconsider its approval of a gas exploration scheme on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

Exploiting our natural landscape for fossil fuels should be a thing of the past. This morning’s judgment is another very concerning step backwards for our vital efforts to reach net zero and comes at a time when record temperatures are engulfing our European neighbours.

We have been proud to support campaigners from Protect Dunsfold in their tenacious efforts to stop UK Oil and Gas (UKOG) from rolling their drilling rigs through their village to do irreparable damage to the local landscape. 

However, with the doors left open to UKOG to go ahead with its gas drilling project, we could now see huge impacts on local wildlife and businesses.

This scheme should never have been approved by the Government in the first place. But in June 2022, the Secretary of State for the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities intervened to overrule two previous rejections of UKOG’s planning application by Surrey County Council.

We have been backing Protect Dunsfold’s legal challenge against the Government’s decision. At a High Court hearing last month, Estelle Dehon KC, representing the campaign group, argued that the Secretary of State’s decision to run roughshod over local democracy and give the green light to exploratory drilling in Dunsfold was unlawful.

On the same day that he gave the Dunsfold drilling site the go-ahead, he refused permission for a comparable site in Ellesmere Port. In this case, greenhouse gas emissions were cited as the most significant factor against granting permission in Ellesmere Port, with the Secretary of State asserting that “every tonne of carbon contributes to climate change”. But when it came to the Dunsfold site, which would generate higher emissions, he reached a different decision. 

The drilling site is also on the edge of the Surrey Hills AONB. In the High Court, Estelle Dehon KC also argued that the Secretary of State had not complied with national policy requiring him to give “great weight” to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty as the starting point in his decision.

With so much at stake and with so many questions over the logic of the Secretary of State’s decision, we are hugely disappointed that the High Court ruled against these legal grounds.

We are now getting advice on the possibility of supporting an appeal by Protect Dunsfold and we will provide an update as soon as we are able to.

Sarah Godwin of Protect Dunsfold Ltd said:

“Protect Dunsfold is deeply disappointed that the Judicial Review judgment handed down today has gone against us. It seems incredible that within the current context of extreme weather conditions throughout the Northern Hemisphere, planning policy still supports such speculative and unnecessary onshore oil and gas exploration. The Court’s decision shows that the Government needs to radically overhaul national planning policy to redress the balance so that the planning authorities always have to take the climate and environmental impact of such proposals into account.

“We will continue to work to change Government policies, and fight for recognition of the very real and imminent threat to our environment, businesses and everyday life related to the continued search for fossil fuels.”

Leigh Day solicitor, Ricardo Gama, said:

“Our clients are disappointed that the court has dismissed their claim for judicial review.

“They feel that there is an important legal principle at stake, which is whether local authorities and the Secretary of State can ignore greenhouse gas emissions when weighing up the public benefits of an exploratory drilling proposal such as this, in a context where greenhouse gas emissions were a reason for refusing a very similar development at Ellesmere Port.

“Our clients are considering an appeal.”

Last Thursday, we were in the High Court supporting the campaign group, Protect Dunsfold, as they challenged the government’s decision to permit a fossil fuel drilling scheme on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

On the day of the hearing, we were delighted to be joined by activists from campaign groups including Extinction Rebellion and Weald Action Group. Our rally outside the Royal Courts of Justice sent a clear message that we can’t continue exploiting our natural landscape for oil and gas.

Speaking in court, Estelle Dehon KC, set out the legal grounds of Protect Dunsfold’s challenge against the decision from the Secretary of State of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to allow UK Oil and Gas to proceed with the scheme.

Dehon argued that the Secretary of State had not complied with national policy requiring him to give “great weight” to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty as the starting point in his decision.

The government’s lawyers responded that, even though this requirement had not been mentioned, it had been fulfilled. The simple fact that the AONB had been alluded to in the Secretary of State’s decision, they continued, meant that “great weight” had been given to it as a consideration.

Dehon also argued that there was a key inconsistency in the Secretary of State’s decision-making, which was not explained and which made it unlawful.

On the day he gave the green light to the project at Dunsfold, the Secretary of State refused permission for a similar scheme at a site in Ellesmere Port. This was because of its potential impact on the climate due to greenhouse gas emissions. 

However, the emissions from the proposal at Dunsfold would be higher than the Ellesmere scheme. 

The government’s lawyers disputed this, claiming that differences between the two schemes meant there was no conflict between the two decisions. The Ellesmere Port exploration project involves shale gas, whereas the site at Dunsfold involves conventional gas, to which different policies apply. 

But the response from Dehon was that the type of gas being extracted in each scheme was not relevant. The critical issue was the extent of the greenhouse gas emissions and the climate impact, which were not affected by the type of gas.

It may take several months for judgment to be handed down from the hearing.

You can read the Protect Dunsfold's skeleton argument here, UK Oil and Gas' skeleton argument here and the Secretary of State for Levelling Up Housing and Communities' skeleton argument here.

Thank you for your support.

This Thursday, we will be in the High Court supporting campaign group, Protect Dunsfold, in their legal challenge against the Government’s approval of a fossil fuel exploration scheme at the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

If we want to give ourselves a chance of tackling the climate emergency, we can’t continue exploiting our natural landscape for fossil fuels. 

But in June 2022, the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities decided to approve an exploratory drilling project by UK Oil and Gas in a tranquil stretch of farmers’ fields overlooked by the stunning Hascombe Hill and situated next door to the picture-postcard village of Dunsfold. 

This scandalous decision not only goes against our vital efforts to get to net zero, it also runs roughshod over local democracy- overturning two previous planning permission refusals by Surrey County Council.

We visited Dunsfold to ask local campaigners why they are fighting so hard to overturn this decision.  They told us it was completely unacceptable that UKOG’s drilling rigs could soon be rolling in to churn up this idyllic landscape in search of fossil fuels.

But it is not only the land and local wildlife that are at threat. Businesses including a nearby brewery and a wedding venue could also be badly affected by the drilling. And an annual cancer awareness festival on an adjoining field may be forced to cancel if the drilling takes place.

The Government’s decision has also attracted opposition from the local MP , and now Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt. We were pleasantly surprised when he previously shared our crowdfunder for the legal challenge.

It is likely that it will take several months for a judgment to be handed down after  Thursday’s hearing, but the outcome could have significant implications far beyond Dunsfold. 

Success would force the Government to reconsider their approval of the scheme and  also could lead to changes in how future on-shore fossil fuel projects go through the planning permission process. 

At the High Court,the claimants, Protect Dunsfold will make two legal arguments. 

The first relates to inconsistency in decision-making by the Secretary of State, who gave the Dunsfold drilling site the go-ahead on the same day that he refused permission for a comparable site in Ellesmere Port. 

In this case, greenhouse gas emissions were cited as the most significant factor against granting permission, with the Secretary of State stating that ‘every tonne of carbon contributes to climate change’. When it came to Dunsfold, he reached a different decision. 

The second argument relates to the site being on the edge of Surrey Hills, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. National policy requires planning decisions to give great weight to “conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty” in AONBs. The Government’s reasons for departing from this requirement were never fully explained.

Thank you for your support.

We are continuing to support the campaign group, Protect Dunsfold, to challenge the Government’s decision to allow a fossil fuel exploration scheme on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Last month, we were delighted that the High Court overturned a previous decision and gave permission for Protect Dunsfold’s legal challenge to go ahead. Our court hearing will take place on 8 June.  

The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is stark about our chances to stop the world from warming by more than 1.5C. If our planet is to survive, there’s no future for coal, oil and gas.

So there it is in black and white: exploiting our natural landscape for gas should be a thing of the past. 

This is at the heart of why we are supporting legal action which challenges the scandalous decision of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to run roughshod over Surrey County Council’s previous refusals and gave permission for exploratory drilling in Dunsfold.

Protect Dunsfold’s challenge takes forward two legal arguments. The first relates to the inconsistency in decision-making by the Secretary of State, who gave the Dunsfold drilling site the go-ahead on the same day that he refused permission for a comparable site in Ellesmere Port. 

Despite greenhouse gas emissions being the most significant factor against granting permission in Ellesmere Port- with the Secretary of State stating that “every tonne of carbon contributes to climate change”- when it came to Dunsfold, a different decision was reached.

The second argument relates to the drilling site being on the edge of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). National policy requires planning decisions to give great weight to “conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty” in AONBs. The reasons for departing from this requirement were never fully explained. 

It is now full speed ahead to the hearing in June.

We are delighted that campaigners from Protect Dunsfold- who we have been supporting- have been given permission by the High Court to challenge the Government’s approval of a gas exploration scheme on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Today’s decision overturns a previous ruling in Protect Dunsfold’s challenge and comes at a crucial time. UK Oil & Gas (UKOG) recently announced that they had discovered gas worth an estimated £123m in the area.

Protect Dunsfold were successful in gaining permission to proceed on two of their legal arguments. The first relates to inconsistency in decision-making by the Secretary of State, who gave the Dunsfold drilling site the go-ahead on the same day that he refused permission for a comparable site in Ellesmere Port. 

Despite greenhouse gas emissions being the most significant factor against granting permission in Ellesmere Port, with the Secretary of State stating that ‘every tonne of carbon contributes to climate change’, when it came to Dunsfold, the Secretary of State reached a different decision. 

The second argument relates to the site being on the edge of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). National policy requires planning decisions to give great weight to “conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty” in AONBs. The reasons for departing from this requirement were never fully explained. 

So with some positive momentum behind us, we are now keen to push ahead with this legal challenge to stop the doors being opened to fracking and to protect the area’s woodland, natural habitats and local businesses. 

Let’s be clear, exploiting our natural landscape for gas should be a thing of the past. The Department for Levelling Up, Communities and Housing’s decision to run roughshod over Surrey County Council’s previous refusals and give permission for exploratory drilling to take place in the first place was scandalous and completely at odds with our mission towards net zero.

The local MP and now Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt MP, has also previously supported the campaign against the Government’s approval for the scheme and our fundraising efforts to support it.

We are grateful to Extinction Rebellion for their support today and the rally that they organised outside of the Royal Courts of Justice.

Director of Good Law Project, Jo Maugham, said:

“No Secretary of State who cared about the natural environment – or climate change – would have ignored the wishes of local people to grant planning permission for a huge new fracking project next to an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

“We are pleased the High Court has given Protect Dunsfold, who we are supporting, permission to bring a judicial review challenge to a decision made under Michael Gove.”

Director of Protect Dunsfold, Phil Travis, said:

“It’s great news that we are now going full speed ahead with this legal challenge which has emphasised the inconsistencies of the Secretary of State’s decision making over fossil fuel exploration schemes.

“It’s very encouraging to see that the courts have now recognised that climate change should be a central consideration when it comes to planning matters.

“We have always hoped that our campaign would mark a new era of resistance against fossil fuel exploration and extraction projects. So we are very grateful to our lawyers at Leigh Day and the support of Good Law Project”.

Tomorrow, we will be in the High Court to support a campaigning group in their bid to resume a legal challenge against fossil fuel drilling on the edge of the Surrey Hills.

Back in October, we heard the disappointing news that the group, Protect Dunsfold, had been refused permission to continue with a legal challenge - but tomorrow, we have the opportunity to overturn this ruling. 

The permission hearing comes at a crucial time. Last week, UK Oil & Gas (UKOG) reported discovering gas worth an estimated £123m in the area, after being given the green light by the Government to drill there in June 2022. 

Surrey County Council had refused to allow the exploratory work to go ahead on two separate occasions, but it was overruled by the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. 

There is so much at stake here. If UKOG are allowed to continue with their operations in the area, we could see irreparable damage to this Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and its habitats and the door opened to fracking.

Opening major new fossil fuel extraction schemes should be a thing of the past. We have seen plenty of inertia from the Government over tackling the climate emergency, but approving this harmful scheme is a significant step backwards. 

It is notable that the local MP and now Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, has also previously campaigned against fossil fuel drilling activity in the area and encouraged people to donate to our legal challenge. This has been a surprising, but welcome source of support.

Sarah Godwin of Protect Dunsfold said:

"This application has been refused twice by Surrey County Council.  The nation is demanding rapid action on the climate emergency, made more urgent by global instability and war.  We are very glad that the Good Law Project exists to challenge these important government decisions on environmental issues, funded by popular subscription."

Thank you for your support.

In October, we heard the disappointing news that community group, Protect Dunsfold, had been refused permission to continue with a legal challenge- that we have been supporting- against a new exploratory drilling site on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

Despite this setback, Protect Dunsfold vowed that they were not going to give up with so much at stake. So, we are now very pleased to confirm that they have been given the opportunity to overturn this decision at a hearing on 2nd March. We hope that the court will grant permission for this vital legal challenge to resume.

The threat to the Surrey Hills arose after the local council was overruled by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, under Michael Gove’s leadership, to give approval to the drilling project. This scandalous intervention runs roughshod over local democracy and could potentially open the door to fracking and fossil fuel mining activity.

Opening major new fossil fuel extraction schemes should be a thing of the past. We have seen plenty of inertia from the Government over tackling the climate emergency, but approving this harmful scheme is a significant step backwards.

We will continue to fight for our green spaces and for robust and urgent action from the Government to reach net zero.

We have just heard that local community group Protect Dunsfold has been refused permission to proceed with their legal challenge to Michael Gove’s decision to overrule Surrey Council and force through a new drilling site on the edge of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. But we and Protect Dunsfold refuse to give up. The issues at stake are simply too important. 

The threat of fracking looms large once more over our countryside, communities and climate. Liz Truss and Jacob-Rees Mogg are tearing up the 2019 Conservative manifesto pledge to end this harmful practice, without any public mandate whatsoever. 

That’s why local community group Protect Dunsfold, supported by Good Law Project, are asking for the Loxley exploratory drilling permission decision to be reviewed at an oral hearing. 

This action is about protecting an important green space from a drilling project that could not only cause severe damage to Surrey Hills, but open the door to future projects that will add to the UK’s carbon footprint. 

We won’t just stand by.

Sarah Godwin from Protect Dunsfold said: 

“We have been campaigning since 2019 to stop this application by UK Oil and Gas Plc to drill for hydrocarbons, supported by local residents and the wider community. It is hard to understand why the Government sees fit to overrule Surrey County, Waverley Borough and local Parish Councils when there is a declared climate emergency and strong local resistance to this application.

The Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is a vital green area providing safe habitat to many and varied wildlife, flora and fauna plus providing a popular rural environment for visitors and residents to enjoy.

We intend it should stay this way and we are grateful for the support from both the local councils, Good Law Project and the community. We will not back down.”

Jo Maugham from Good Law Project said: 

“We share the local community’s determination to keep going. After a summer of unbearable heat and wildfires, the impacts of climate change on life in the UK have never been clearer.  It baffles us that Liz Truss and her government think digging up more fossil fuels is a good idea and without any public mandate whatsoever are threatening to go back on their word on fracking. 

We will continue to stand side-by-side with the local people of Dunsfold in their campaign to protect the environment.”

If you are in a position to do so, please consider donating to the community group’s legal challenge here.

We believe that prospects for the renewal are good because the Judge did not raise any additional points and seems to have just adopted the Secretary of State’s reasoning. You can read the permission decision here.

Leigh Day Solicitors, Estelle Dehon QC (Cornerstone Barristers) and Alex Shattock (Landmark Chambers) have been instructed in this case.