Campaigners begin High Court challenge to prevent gas drilling in rural Surrey

Environmental campaigners have been at the High Court to challenge plans to begin gas drilling in rural Surrey.

Campaigners from the group Protect Dunsfold and Waverley Borough Council are bringing legal action over a Government decision to allow an exploratory oil and gas well to be dug near the village of Dunsfold in Surrey.

The proposed site is located in the Surrey Hills, in an area of great landscape value, and sits on the border of an area of outstanding natural beauty.

Surrey County Council previously refused permission for the proposal in December 2019, but following a public inquiry in 2021, planning inspectors recommended that an appeal against this decision should be allowed.

Housing Minister Stuart Andrew later approved the plans for Ukog to explore a site in Dunsfold in June 2022.

After the Government's decision to allow the exploratory drilling, the area's MP and Chancellor Jeremy Hunt called the move "bitterly disappointing and wrong both economically and environmentally".

However, on Thursday, the group and council were given the go-ahead to bring a legal challenge against the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and the site's potential developers, UK Oil and Gas (Ukog).

At a preliminary hearing at the High Court in London in March, lawyers for Protect Dunsfold and Waverley Borough Council argued that allowing the digging for gas exploration at the site is inconsistent with the Government's planning policies.

"Both the Inspector and the Secretary of State found that harm will be caused to the area of outstanding natural beauty itself, albeit that the scale of the harm is tempered by its short-term nature," Jenny Wigley KC, for the council, said in written submissions.

Estelle Dehon KC, for the group, said that the Government's National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF), which protects areas of outstanding natural beauty, requires "great weight" to be given to conserving the protected areas.

She continued in written submissions: "This failure by the inspector and the Secretary of State to afford great weight to the harm to the area of outstanding natural beauty is an important omission in a decision which held that permission should be granted despite the development not being in accordance with the development plan."

Lawyers for DLUHC and Ukog are contesting the case.

Guy Williams, for the department, said in written arguments for the March hearing: "The court may proceed on the basis that the decision-maker has understood and applied the policy lawfully, particularly well-trodden policy, in the absence of any positive indication to the contrary."

However, Mr Justice Lane said that neither the Government nor the developer "delivered a knockout blow" to the legal challenge going ahead, allowing the bid on a total of three grounds.

"I consider these grounds are arguable," he concluded.

The hearing is due to start at 10.30am and campaigners will be outside the Royal Courts of Justice from 9am alongside Extinction Rebellion protesters.