The case had originally started out as a claim focused on an allegation that the SSEFRA had failed to take into account the advice of Henry Dimbleby set out in his National Food Strategy Review that dietary change and, in particular, the reduction of the consumption of meat and diary ought to form part of the Food Strategy.

Permission was refused on the papers and following an oral hearing. The Claimant appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal refused permission on the papers for most grounds, but held an oral permission hearing into the section 13 ground and granted permission, principally due to the importance of the point. The Court of Appeal retained jurisdiction to hear the substantive claim for judicial review and the claim became the effective lead case into this issue, which is live in a number of other cases such as the Jet Zero challenge.

This is an important decision on the scope of the duty under section 13 of the Climate Change Act 2008. The question the Court of Appeal had to resolve was whether the duty of the “Secretary of State” in section 13(1) of the Climate Change Act 2008 to “prepare such proposals and policies as the Secretary of State considers will enable the carbon budgets that have been set under this Act to be met” applied to the preparation and publication by the SSEFRA of the Government’s food strategy, i.e. whether the duty applied to all Secretaries of State or just SSESNZ.

The Claimant argued that the duty of “Secretary of State” under section 13 of the Climate Change Act 2008 applies to both SSBEIS and SSEFRA, each of whom is a Secretary of State who can carry out and exercise any of the powers conferred by statute on the Secretary of State. In the result, the Claimant said that the duty applied to SSEFRA when the Food Strategy was produced.

The Court of Appeal held that as a matter of construction of section 13 itself, in the context of the comprehensive functions given to the Secretary of State under the Climate Change Act 2008, “Secretary of State” in section 13 is a reference to the Secretary of State who is responsible for climate change, i.e. at present SSESNEZ.

The Court of Appeal said: “The statutory scheme envisages the duties laid down in Part 1 of the Climate Change Act being discharged by one Secretary of State, with whom responsibility lies for making the necessary judgments and undertaking the necessary steps. That Secretary of State is the Secretary of State who is charged with the conduct of the national response to climate change and the setting of carbon budgets. By contrast with the position in Northern Ireland under section 13 of the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, this statutory scheme does not contemplate the splitting of that work between different ministers and different departments of government.”

The application for judicial review was accordingly dismissed.

Mark Westmoreland Smith acted for the Secretaries of State