UK appeals court rules against third runway at Heathrow

Campaigners have won a Court of Appeal ruling against the UK government on environmental grounds over plans for a proposed £14 billion (€16.4 billion) third runway at London’s Heathrow airport.

The judgment handed down on Thursday morning found that the government failed to assess the impact of Heathrow’s expansion plan on climate change effects under the Paris Agreement, and ruled that the government’s aviation national policy statement was unlawful.

The ruling is a big setback for Heathrow in its in the long-running saga to build a third runway. The court said the UK government had not lodged an appeal against the decision.

Campaigners heralded the judgment on Thursday.

Irish in-flight entertainment firm blames coronavirus for closure

---

Air France-KLM says coronavirus will wipe as much as €200m from earnings

---

Ryanair appeals over its failed defamation action against pilots

---

Qatar Airways boosts stake in Aer Lingus-owner IAG to 25%

---

"Today's landmark Heathrow judgment is a victory for Londoners and future generations," said Sadiq Khan, mayor of London, who was involved in one of the judicial review cases. "We face a climate emergency and I'm delighted that the Court of Appeal has recognised that the government cannot ignore its climate change responsibilities."

Mr Khan added: “The government must now finally see sense and abandon plans for a third runway at Heathrow.”

Sending a signal

Lord Randall, climate adviser to former prime minister Theresa May, said: "This is an opportunity for Boris Johnson to put Heathrow expansion to bed and focus on the most important diplomatic event of his premiership, the COP climate summit in Glasgow later this year. It's his chance to shine on the world stage. In choosing to accept the court's decision [Mr Johnson] is sending a signal that UK plc can prosper without expanding airports and ripping up our commitments on the climate crisis."

Margaretha Wewerinke, assistant professor of public international law at Leiden University, said the decision would have "global" implications.

“For the first time, a court has confirmed that the Paris Agreement temperature goal of pursuing efforts to keep warming below 1.5C has binding effect,” she said. “The Court of Appeal’s effective dismissal of this argument could inspire similar litigation in other countries that have signed the Paris Agreement, but conveniently ignore its temperature goal when approving carbon-intensive projects or enacting dirty energy policies.” – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2020