High Court Upholds Gatwick Northern Runway Project
Campaign groups opposing the expansion of Gatwick Airport are evaluating their options for an appeal after the High Court rejected their legal challenges against the government's decision. The Transport Secretary, Heidi Alexander, had approved a £2.2 billion plan in September to relocate Gatwick's emergency runway by 12 meters, enabling a dual-runway operation.
The anti-noise organization Cagne and campaigner Peter Barclay had argued in a January hearing that the scheme was unlawful, asserting that the government had not adequately assessed its climate impact. However, Mr. Justice Mould dismissed both bids, concluding that the project would not "materially impact" the government's ability to achieve its net-zero targets. London Gatwick hailed the decision as a "victory for common sense."
The Department for Transport (DfT) and Gatwick Airport Limited, the airport's owner, defended the challenge, with the airport's lawyers describing the claims as "unarguable." The expansion is projected to increase Gatwick's annual flight capacity from approximately 280,000 to 389,000 by the late 2030s.
Economic Benefits and Justification for Expansion
In a 100-page judgment, the judge also rejected arguments against the necessity of the airport's expansion, despite its proximity to Heathrow, which is about 40 miles (64 km) away. The judge noted that the DfT considered the West Sussex airport primarily a leisure hub, largely served by low-cost carriers, with an anticipated increase in passenger numbers.
Mr. Justice Mould stated that Alexander had "considered both the need for and the socio-economic effects of the proposed development to be important." He added, "Her conclusions are rational and supported by proper, adequate and intelligible reasons."
Campaigners Vow to Continue Fight
"We will not accept this judgment as the final word."
Cagne (Communities Against Gatwick Noise Emissions)
Following the ruling, Cagne (Communities Against Gatwick Noise Emissions) declared that it would not accept the judgment "as the final word." The group indicated that its legal team would explore an appeal, reiterating its commitment to "stand up for the communities who will be forced to live with the consequences of this expansion."
Campaigners highlighted that communities across Kent, Surrey, and Sussex had contributed to funding the legal action due to their "grave and legitimate" concerns, which include issues related to infrastructure, sewerage treatment, noise, air quality, and emissions. Sally Pavey, from Cagne, had previously stated that the plans were "not making best use of existing runways."
Barclay, who chairs the Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign, pointed out that both the independent Climate Change Committee and the Parliamentary Environmental Audit Committee had advised against airport expansion. He commented, "The expansion decision ignores that advice," and suggested that the outcome implies "that noise policies are not worth the paper they are written on." Both Cagne and Barclay challenged the government's planning decision through a judicial review.
Gatwick and DfT Welcome Ruling
A spokesperson for London Gatwick expressed satisfaction with the High Court's decision to uphold the government's approval for the Northern Runway Project. They stated, "Our exciting plans will deliver significant business, tourism and trade benefits for the UK, including 14,000 new jobs and a £1bn boost to the economy every year. This is a victory for common sense."
A DfT spokesperson also welcomed the High Court ruling, emphasizing that the project "balances our environmental and climate commitments with huge economic benefits – bringing around 14,000 new jobs to local people, and delivering £1bn a year to benefit all four corners of the UK."