The High Court granted Greenpeace permission to proceed with a Judicial Review of the Government’s decision to launch a new licensing oil and gas round, with fossil fuel companies submitting more than 100 licences to explore for new oil and gas.

The judge has granted permission to Greenpeace for a full Judicial Review of the Government’s decision not to take into account the environmental effects of consuming the oil and gas to be extracted in the new licensing round.

Greenpeace launched legal proceedings against the UK government that claim Ministers broke the law. The NGO claims decision taken by former Business Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg was unlawful because it did not consider full climate impact of new licenses.

They call for the decision to award the new licences to be reversed, arguing that new oil and gas exploration and development is incompatible with the UK’s own rules and international climate obligations.

It follows research by University College London that stated new North Sea oil and gas fields are incompatible with limiting warming in line with Paris Agreement.

Greenpeace is challenging the Government on the basis that it has “botched” the decision making process, in the first days of the Liz Truss administration, and failed to properly assess the climate impact of the new oil and gas licensing round.

‘Transition of energy cannot happen overnight’

“Unless you can explain how we can transition (to net zero) without oil and gas, we need oil and gas,” said energy secretary Grant Shapps at the end of March.

A government spokesperson said: “It’s vital we continue to maintain our energy security by boosting our homegrown energy supply and strengthening our domestic resilience. While our plans to power up Britain include significant investment in new renewable and nuclear projects, the transition to non-fossil forms of energy cannot happen overnight, as recognised by the independent Climate Change Committee.”