On May 3, 2024, a High Court ruling in the UK declared the government’s approval of its Carbon Budget Delivery Plan in March 2023 as unlawful. The judge, Mr Justice Sheldon, found the plan lacked sufficient evidence to demonstrate how it would achieve the set carbon emissions targets, marking a significant legal setback for the UK government’s climate policy for the second year in a row.

The case against the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero was brought forward by a coalition of environmental charities and legal groups. They argued that the government failed to provide a detailed and quantifiable strategy, making it impossible to assess whether the climate goals, particularly the goal to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, could be met. This challenge follows previous criticisms and legal actions by similar groups advocating for stronger and more transparent governmental action on climate change.

The court highlighted a lack of clarity and detail in the government’s plan, specifically pointing out the former Secretary of State Grant Shapps’ inability to present adequate supporting evidence for the plan’s approval. In his judgment, Mr Justice Sheldon emphasized the necessity for the government to fulfill its legal obligations regarding emissions reductions and to devise a plan that aligns with the UK’s climate targets.

Following the ruling, environmental campaigners and legal representatives expressed satisfaction, noting the court’s decision reinforces the need for credible, substantial action on climate change. The government has been urged to overhaul its approach and provide a clear, robust plan to meet future carbon budgets and commitments.

In response, the government defended its climate initiatives and acknowledged the court’s decision, committing to redraft the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan. Officials stated their intention to publish a revised report within a year, continuing to affirm their dedication to achieving net-zero emissions.

This High Court decision underscores ongoing legal and public scrutiny over the UK government’s climate policies and the broader implications of such rulings on future climate action frameworks.