Rosebank oilfield approval ruled unlawful – here’s why it’s an ‘incredible victory’ for the planet

The decision to approve a giant new oilfield off Scotland has been ruled unlawful by the courts – an outcome that campaigners have hailed as an “incredible victory” for the planet.

In 2023, the previous Conservative government green-lit the Rosebank development, approving drilling in the UK’s biggest untapped oilfield.

The field – located off the Shetland Islands – contains 500 million barrels of oil and could produce 200 million tonnes of CO2.

• The sewage crisis is your fault: How water firms use same deceptive tactics as Big Oil and Big Tobacco
• Polarisation and a test for Starmer: How Trump 2.0 will pose a major climate challenge for the UK
• ‘Dystopian’: Rachel Reeves backs third Heathrow runway. What will it mean for the planet?

Climate campaigners were “sickened” by the approval. But today (30 January), they enjoyed a “historic victory”: the court of session in Edinburgh ruled that consent for the Rosebank and Jackdaw North Sea oil and gas fields was granted unlawfully, because regulators failed to consider the climate impact of burning oil and gas.

Previously, environmental regulators only considered the impact of emissions caused by the process of extracting oil and gas. Today, Lord Ericht ruled that they would also have to consider so-called “downstream” emissions – those that result from burning this gas.

In his judgement, Lord Ericht said he was following precedent set in a June 2024 case, which determined that oil wells near London’s Gatwick Airport could not be approved without considering these emissions.

“The public interest in authorities acting lawfully and the private interest of members of the public in climate change outweigh the private interest of the developers”, Lord Ericht stated.

Tessa Khan – a climate lawyer and executive director of Uplift, one of the organisations that brought the legal challenge alongside Greenpeace – welcomed the judgement.

“This is a significant win which means that Rosebank cannot go ahead without accounting for its enormous climate harm,” she said.

“The continued burning of oil and gas is why we are seeing more extreme weather like Storm Eowyn and flooding that have claimed lives and caused hundreds of millions of pounds in damage and clean up costs, not to mention the devastation it’s causing in other countries. Most people are now joining the dots with endless oil and gas drilling and are worried about the future.”

The International Energy Agency have said no new oil and gas exploration should take place if the world is to prevent global warming exceeding 1.5C above preindustrial temperatures.

What next for the Rosebank oilfield project?

Equinor – the Norwegian oil giant which applied for permission to drill Rosebank – said it “welcomed the judgement” because it allows preparatory work to continue even while drilling is prohibited.

“We will continue to work closely with the regulators and DESNZ to progress the Rosebank project,” they said.

Shell, which is behind the Jackdaw field, made a similar statement. “Swift action is needed from the government so that we and other North Sea operators can make decisions about vital UK energy infrastructure,” a spokesperson added.

Energy secretary Ed Miliband and the regulator, the North Sea Transition Authority, must now reconsider whether or not to grant consent.

Energy companies claim that the development will bring greater energy security to the United Kingdom.

But this is questionable, says Josh Burke, distinguished policy fellow at the at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. Most of the oil produced in the oilfield would have been sold on the international markets, yielding huge profits for developers.

“The development of Rosebank and Jackdaw would have made no significant difference to the UK’s energy security, or the prices consumers pay for heating and electricity,” Burke said.

“The verdict rightfully quashed the approval of a new oil site in the North Sea on the grounds that the vast emissions produced when the oil and gas is burned had not properly been factored into the decision.”

Lauren MacDonald, from the Stop Rosebank campaign, echoed this consideration.

“Almost all of Rosebank’s oil would be sold overseas, doing nothing to lower our bills or make us more secure, with most of the profits going straight to the state-backed Norwegian firm, Equinor.”

The companies will now submit new environmental impact assessments for examination by the government.

Before the general election, Labour claimed it would end all new North Sea oil and gas projects – but added that previous projects approved by the Conservatives would not be scrapped. Rosebank now falls between these two pledges; it is not a “new project”, per se, but old approvals no longer apply. Nonetheless, campaigners are hopeful this will be the end of the line for the “carbon bomb” project.

“Now that the ball is back in the government’s court, ministers have the opportunity to sort out the legal mess left by their predecessors,” said Philip Evans, senior campaigner at Greenpeace UK.

“They should use this moment to set out a new path for the North Sea, reaffirming their commitment to no new oil and gas, and prioritising clean energy.”

Do you have a story to tell or opinions to share about this? Get in touch and tell us more. Big Issue exists to give homeless and marginalised people the opportunity to earn an income. To support our work buy a copy of the magazine or get the app from the App Store or Google Play.