High Court backs Gatwick expansion after climate challenge fails

Gatwick’s £2.2bn Northern Runway Project survived a major legal challenge after the High Court ruled that climate objections did not make the airport expansion unlawful. The decision leaves in place a plan to move the standby northern runway 12 metres north, paving the way for a two-runway operation at one of the UK’s busiest airports.

Mr Justice Mould delivered the 195-page judgment after a four-day rolled-up judicial review hearing in January 2026. He rejected arguments brought by campaigner Peter Barclay and Communities Against Gatwick Noise Emissions, or CAGNE, finding the project’s climate impacts would not materially affect the government’s ability to meet net zero targets. The court accepted that the scheme would have moderately adverse and significant effects, but said that was not enough to defeat the consent granted by Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander.

The ruling matters far beyond Sussex because it shows the standard courts are applying to airport expansion challenges: campaigners must do more than show harm. They must persuade judges that a minister’s decision failed in law, or that the environmental assessment was so flawed it altered the government’s ability to meet national climate commitments. In this case, the High Court said the line had not been crossed. Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign, or GACC, was also involved in the response to the challenge.

The decision preserves a project that Gatwick says would allow around 100,000 extra flights a year, lift annual passenger capacity to up to 80 million, create about 14,000 jobs and add £1 billion a year to the economy. The airport says the scheme is privately financed and will require no taxpayer money. Development consent was granted on 21 September 2025, the Gatwick Airport (Northern Runway Project) Development Consent Order 2025 came into force on 12 October 2025, and a correction notice and correction order were issued on 20 January 2026.

The next legal move now lies with the campaigners, who have seven days under the rules for nationally significant infrastructure challenges to seek permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Their defeat suggests that, for now, the courts are placing heavy weight on the government’s net zero framework while giving ministers room to approve transport schemes that promise jobs, investment and capacity. For airport opponents, the harder fight is becoming not whether aviation growth has climate costs, but whether those costs can still defeat a consent order in law.