A court has ruled that consent for two new Scottish oil and gas fields was granted unlawfully and their owners must seek fresh approval from the UK government before drilling can begin.
The written judgement on the Rosebank and Jackdaw fields came after a case brought by environmental campaigners, Uplift and Greenpeace, at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.
In his judgement, Lord Ericht said a more detailed assessment of the fields’ environmental impact was required, taking into account the effect on the climate of burning any fossil fuels extracted.
He said work on both fields could continue while the new information was gathered but no oil and gas could be extracted unless fresh approval was granted.
Permission for the Rosebank oil development, 80 miles west of Shetland in the North Atlantic, was granted in autumn 2023.
In a 57-page judgement, Lord Ericht wrote that there was a public interest in having the decision “remade on a lawful basis” because of the effects of climate change – which he said outweighed the interests of the developers.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has dropped all charges against 34 Greenpeace activists who blockaded Unilever’s London headquarters last September. The decision was made just days before the start of what would have been the largest ‘locking on’ trials ever seen in the UK.
Eight protesters had been facing charges of Aggravated Trespass and a further 26 protesters were charged with the new offence of ‘locking-on’ introduced in the Public Order Act 2023. The letter from the CPS said the charges were dropped because “there is not enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction”. The first trials were due to begin on 15 January at City of London Magistrates’ Court.
The charges related to 5 September 2024 when Greenpeace activists blockaded the entrances to Unilever House in protest at the firm’s ongoing failure to tackle plastic pollution. Climbers scaled the building and attached a huge artwork to the outside wall. Activists also blocked the entrances to the building, locking themselves onto large models of the company’s flagship Dove products and a ‘Dead Dove’ parody of the company logo.
Will McCallum, Co-Executive Director of Greenpeace UK said: “This is a bolt of good news in an otherwise bleak landscape for protest rights. Our activists were facing a combined total of up to 15 years in prison for standing up to one of the world’s largest plastic polluters. The invented crime of ‘locking-on’ is just one new tool in a well-stocked legal arsenal that is being used to stifle dissent and send peaceful protesters to jail. Previous governments brought in these laws and powers, but the responsibility lies with Keir Starmer to end their chilling effect on democracy and repeal them.”
The crime of ‘locking-on’ was one of a number of offences and powers created by recent Conservative governments to crack down on peaceful protest. It has resulted in hundreds of protesters being arrested, often for as little as walking down a street. Last year saw five climate activists sentenced to a total of 21 years in prison for taking part in a Zoom call to discuss a planned protest.
Greenpeace’s protest was part of an ongoing campaign against Unilever after the corporate giant announced a major rollback of plastic reduction targets last year. A Greenpeace International report showed that it was the largest corporate seller of single-use plastic sachets, selling the equivalent of 1,700 a second.
Daniel Jones, interim head of Greenpeace’s plastics campaign, said: “This is an important milestone in our campaign against Dove’s toxic brand of beauty. We reluctantly staged our protest last September after months of failed talks with Unilever and multiple attempts to raise our concerns in other ways. Since then, Unilever has come back to the table and has begun playing a more constructive role in negotiations for a Global Plastics Treaty. We won’t stop until the company commits to reducing plastic production – particularly of its super-polluting plastic sachets.”
‘Locking-on’ involves protesters attaching themselves to another person, building or object to make it harder for police to remove them. It has long been used as a tactic by protesters, including by the Suffragettes. The Public Order Act 2023 contained the new offences of locking-on and being ‘equipped for locking on’.
Protesters sing Christmas carols outside the Home Office, December 12, 2024Photo: Talia Woodin @taltakingpic
“AWAY in a police car” echoed outside the Home Office on Wednesday as campaigners belted out renditions of Christmas carols, calling for the government to repeal draconian anti-protest laws.
Dressed in Christmas jumpers and Santa hats, carollers from Amnesty International UK, Greenpeace and Liberty sang festive songs including The Twelve Days of Protest and Silent Protest.
They then handed in a petition to the Home Office, calling on it to scrap protest restrictions introduced by previous governments, alongside a letter to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper demanding an urgent meeting to discuss the state of protest rights in Britain.
A series of repressive laws have made the right to protest increasingly hard to exercise.
They include the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, which allows police to ban or restrict “unacceptable” protests, and the Public Order Act 2023 which criminalised protesters “locking on” and fastening themselves to each other or objects.
Punitive jail terms handed out since their enactment include one Just Stop Oil protester being sentenced to six months for slow marching on a road for 30 minutes, while five others from the group received a combined 21 years for co-ordinating a non-violent action over Zoom.
Greenpeace activists board a Shell platform headed toward the North Sea on February 6, 2023. (Photo: Lou Benoist/AFP via Getty Images)
“Shell thought suing us for millions over a peaceful protest would intimidate us, but this case became a PR millstone tied around its neck,” said the co-executive director of Greenpeace U.K.
The United Kingdom-based oil giant Shell agreed Tuesday to settle a major lawsuit the company brought against Greenpeace after activists from the group boarded and occupied a company oil platform last year to protest fossil fuel expansion.
Greenpeace said in a statement that as part of the settlement, it agreed to donate £300,000—roughly $382,000—to the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, a charity that helps save lives at sea, but will pay nothing to Shell and accept no liability. The donation represents a fraction of the over $11 million in damages and legal costs defendants faced, the group said.
The Greenpeace defendants have also “agreed to avoid protesting for a period at four Shell sites in the northern North Sea.”
“Shell thought suing us for millions over a peaceful protest would intimidate us, but this case became a PR millstone tied around its neck,” said Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace U.K. “The public backlash against its bullying tactics made it back down and settle out of court.”
“This settlement shows that people power works. Thousands of ordinary people across the country backed our fight against Shell and their support means we stay independent and can keep holding Big Oil to account,” Hamid added. “This legal battle might be over, but Big Oil’s dirty tricks aren’t going away. With Greenpeace facing further legal battles around the world, we won’t stop campaigning until the fossil fuel industry stops drilling and starts paying for the damage it is causing to people and planet.”
“These aggressive legal tactics, the huge sums of money, and attempts to block the right to protest pose a massive threat.”
Shell brought the case, which Greenpeace characterized as a “textbook” strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP), in February 2023 and sought $1 million in damages from activists who boarded a Shell-contracted ship carrying equipment to drill for oil in the North Sea.
“When the protest ended, the only damage Shell could find was a padlock which, they alleged, our activists broke. That’s it,” Greenpeace U.K. said Tuesday. “Yet they came after us with a million-dollar lawsuit, which they justified for their spending on safety.”
The group, which warned that the case had dire implications for the right to protest, credited a “sustained, year-long campaign against the suit” for forcing the oil behemoth to back down. The campaign, according to Greenpeace, “turned the legal move into a PR embarrassment for Shell.”
“The case was dubbed the ‘Cousin Greg’ lawsuit by Forbes after a scene in the Emmy-awarded drama Succession, in which the hapless character threatens to sue Greenpeace to universal dismay,” the environmental group noted Tuesday.
Greenpeace is currently facing several other SLAPP suits, including one brought by Energy Transfer, majority-owner of the Dakota Access pipeline. The group said Tuesday that the Energy Transfer suit “threatens the very existence of Greenpeace in the U.S.”
“These aggressive legal tactics, the huge sums of money, and attempts to block the right to protest pose a massive threat. It could stop Greenpeace being able to make a real difference on the things that matter most,” the organization said Tuesday. “It’s part of a growing trend by powerful corporations and governments to crush peaceful protest—using draconian laws or intimidation lawsuits like this.”
“It seeks to silence the people most impacted by the climate crisis. This threatens the global fight for climate justice,” the group added. “We won’t give up. This is Shell versus all of us.”
Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
