Department to pursue Supreme Court challenge on gas cavern ruling

Stormont’s Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (Daera) is reportedly preparing to apply directly to the Supreme Court for permission to contest a judgment concerning a gas storage project in Larne Lough. Campaigners who prevailed in their legal action against the project this summer have expressed their “surprised and disappointed” reactions. The ruling, which invalidated the authorization for gas storage caverns beneath Larne Lough, mandates that specific decisions on such projects must be made by the executive as a whole, rather than by a single minister. Daera had previously submitted a request to the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland for leave to proceed to the Supreme Court, but this request was denied. The proposed gas caverns project would have involved excavating seven substantial caverns under Larne Lough for the purpose of natural gas storage. The No Gas Caverns campaign group, supported by Friends of the Earth, successfully appealed against the project in June 2024. The Court of Appeal stated that a determination by the former Agriculture and Environment Minister Edwin Poots, deeming the project not significant or controversial, was “irrational.” It concluded that any decision to grant a marine licence should have been made by the Stormont Executive collectively. James Orr from Friends of the Earth characterized the choice to pursue a challenge against that ruling as surprising. He commented, “This attempt impacts the community who yet again have to put their lives on hold to protect their coastline and marine life against the dirty fossil fuel industry.” He further added that the application constituted “another threat” to meeting Northern Ireland’s climate commitments. Campaigners from the No Gas Caverns group conveyed their “dismayed and disappointed” feelings at the prospect of any return to court. In a statement, they declared: “We are even more disappointed that Minister Muir, who has made public commitments to make the climate emergency his priority, is attempting to overturn the Court of Appeal decision which ensures that fossil fuel projects which go against our statutory climate change targets are considered by all ministers and are not subject to a decision of a single minister.” The groups indicated that they had “instructed their legal team to vehemently oppose the grant of permission to appeal.” The option to apply for permission to appeal this case to the Supreme Court was consistently available to both the department and the developers. Additionally, the minister had previously voiced his concern regarding the constitutional implications of the ruling. However, the legal environment surrounding fossil fuel applications has been undergoing changes. Legally-binding climate change obligations imply that governments failing to meet targets will face consequences. The Court of Appeal’s judgment in this case, while primarily focusing on the governance aspect, did make reference to the broader context of climate change. Furthermore, in a series of decisions, the Supreme Court has clearly articulated its conviction that judgments on planning applications related to fossil fuels must account for “downstream emissions”—the effects resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels. Should Supreme Court judges agree to hear the department’s challenge, the determining factor might be whether they interpret the ruling from a constitutional or an environmental perspective.