Oceana UK v. Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero

Oceana UK, represented by public interest law firm Leigh Day, filed a complaint on August 22, 2024 against the United Kingdom's decision on the issuing of 28 licenses for oil and gas exploration. Between October 2023 and May 2024, the UK, through the North Sea Transition Authority, issued 82 oil and gas exploration licenses, with Oceana UK contending the unlawfulness of 28 of those licenses. The licenses cover 226 blocks in the North Sea, with over ⅔ of the licenses residing in marine protected areas. The 82 licenses issued are expected to result in 600 million barrels of oil equivalent, while oil spills were not considered in the impact assessments of the issued licenses. Oceana UK contends that these licenses were unlawful on several grounds, including failure to consider environmental risks, the dismissal of expert advice, and climate impact oversight. 21 out of the 28 licenses are inside designated marine protected areas, which typically protect wildlife like harbour porpoise, grey seals, and puffins. Oceana UK asserts that the potential for accidental oil spills in these areas was unlawfully excluded in the environmental impact assessments of the licenses, with the occurrence of “more than two oil or chemical spills every day last year from oil and gas developments in UK waters”. The spills over the last year resulted in over 82,000 kg of oil spilling into the sea, posing risks for nearby habitats. Oceana UK also outlines the need for environmental impact assessments to account for emissions, referencing the precedent law established by the Finch ruling. Oceana UK also contends that the dismissal of expert advice from independent government advisors was unlawful, referencing the UK government’s overlooking of advice from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) and Natural England when granting the licenses. Oceana UK asserts that this expert advice was not adequately considered in the environmental assessments conducted by the government. The case was heard in the High Court on 26-27 March 2025.