ENERGY giant Ineos has won the right to have a judicial review of the Scottish Government’s decisions to ban fracking.
The company which runs the Grangemouth oil refinery has also won the right to sue the Government for damages for a breach of its human rights.
Ineos Upstream and Reach Coal Seam Gas went to court to challenge the Government’s decisions taken in 2015 and 2017 respectively to have a moratorium on unconventional oil and gas which includes fracking, and then to make that moratorium permanent.
In a judgement issued by Lord Pentland at the Court of Session, the two companies were granted a judicial review which will take place in May.
In court Lord Pentland said the claim was in an “undeveloped state” while James Mure QC on behalf of the Lord Advocate argued that the 2015 decisions were ‘time-barred’ for judicial review as an application to the courts needs to be made within three months of the decision.
Both firms have said their business has been affected by the 2015 and 2017 decisions and Lord Pentland said in his judgement: “On a provisional view, there may be some possible merit in the proposition that the 2015 and 2017 decisions are closely inter-linked and that this is significant in the wider context of the issues that arise in the case.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel