PROCEDURAL ERRORS:
Assessments covered production emissions, but did not include subsequent emissions from burning oil after it had been extracted, the Supreme Court said
Norway’s Supreme Court yesterday ruled that three oil licenses granted by the government in the North Sea were invalid, since their emissions impact had not adequately been accounted for. The court agreed with climate campaigners, who challenged the validity of the licenses, saying that the environmental impact assessments had not considered the emissions from burning the oil after it had been extracted. The campaigners had already won victories in two lower-court rulings.
Members of Norway’s Supreme Court in Oslo rule on a climate lawsuit yesterday.
Photo: NTB / AFP
The high court ruled that the plans for extraction and expansion were “invalid due to procedural errors.”While emissions assessments were carried out, they only covered so-called production emissions and not the subsequent “combustion emissions,” it said.
“The combustion emissions resulting from petroleum production must be subject to an impact assessment” before a plan is approved, it added. For the decision, the court sat in plenary formation, meaning that 11 judges took part instead of the usual five — a format reserved for important cases. Operations were allowed to continue at the three contested North Sea fields while Norway’s Ministry of Energy appealed the rulings. The oil companies were not parties in the case and the fact the approvals had been declared invalid did not automatically mean the licenses ceased to apply, the Supreme Court said.“The ministry must, however, reassess the case on the basis of proper procedure,” the court said in a statement. The ruling will be closely watched beyond the borders of the Scandinavian country by the many legal experts and environmental groups that have challenged production licences granted to oil companies on climate grounds.