Legal opposition launched against Luton airport expansion

In a letter to Heidi Alexander, Secretary of State for Transport (SoS), signalling the start of the judicial review process, LADACAN says the SoS ignored the recommendation of national planning inspectors to refuse development permission, and that the plans for the expansion failed to include adequate environmental assessments.

Detailed examination of the proposals began in August 2023 and took six months. The inspectors’ report was then sent to the previous government, with consideration delayed by the general election and the resignation of former Transport Secretary Louise Haigh.  

The report concluded that the economic benefits of a new terminal aimed at doubling the airport’s annual passenger numbers did not outweigh the environmental harms. 

Despite this, the government granted consent for the development in April 2025.  

LADACAN argues that this decision was not lawful. The group says that the plans fail to fully assess the likely direct and indirect effects that the development would have on climate change, and fail to set out what would be done to mitigate this. 

LADACAN also argues that the development plans are overly reliant on aspirational technological developments which the government’s Jet Zero Strategy (JZS) sets out as hypothetically capable of offsetting the future impact of aviation expansion on the climate, even though the Climate Change Committee has cast doubt on whether they can actually be delivered. 

In its letter to the SoS, LADACAN calls on the government to accept that the decision was unlawful. The grounds of its claim include: 

• The direct and indirect impacts of the development on climate change via greenhouse gases were incorrectly assessed, excluding emissions from inbound flights as well as emissions associated with the production and delivery of fuel. 
• The plans for the development incorrectly rely on the ‘High Ambition’ scenario of the JZS – a strategy which is subject to ongoing legal challenge. 
• There was an error in law in concluding that the government’s duty under the Climate Change Act 2008 to adopt policies and procedures to help reach net zero was a ‘pollution control regime’. 
• It was wrongfully assumed that compliance with the JZS meant that the climate impact of the development had been addressed. This assumption was flawed as the JZS itself is reliant on the planning process and assessments by planning decision makers.  
• There was a lack of consistency between the Luton decision and the approach taken in the Gatwick Airport expansion assessment, which has been delayed while improvements are made to the plans to address environmental concerns. 

Andrew Lambourne, chair of LADACAN, said: 

“Everyone can see the worsening effects of climate change, and it’s obvious that the damage it causes comes with huge costs. This in turn harms the UK economy, which suggests that the government should be dampening demand for carbon-intensive activities such as frequent flying, rather than encouraging it. Sustainability and quality of life must be properly weighed when assessing development proposals.” 

Leigh Day partner Ricardo Gama, who represents LADACAN, said: 

“Our client’s position is that the Secretary of State should not have overruled the recommendation of expert planning inspectors by approving expansion of Luton Airport, in spite of climate change and other harmful impacts of the development. They believe that growth at the expense of everything else, including the government’s net zero obligations, has longer term costs which outweigh any benefits. We hope that the Secretary of State will reconsider her decision in light of our letter.” 

LADACAN is crowdfunding its legal case via CrowdJustice.