High Court rejects challenge to HyNet Carbon Capture Storage development

16/10/25

Liverpool Bay CCS Limited seeks to develop the Hynet offshore carbon transportation and storage project (the “Development”). This will store, beneath the Irish Sea, approximately 109 million tonnes of CO2 emitted from industrial users in N Wales and NW England. It will form part of the HyNet Cluster of projects forming the world’s first low carbon industrial cluster by 2030. Carbon capture of this sort is an integral part of the UK Government’s strategy for transitioning to Net Zero.

The Claimant group sought to challenge the decisions of the Secretary of State and Oil and Gas Authority to grant consent for this Development on the basis that there had been breaches of the Offshore Oil and Gas Exploration, Production, Unloading and Storage (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2020 (the “EIA Regs”) and the Offshore Petroleum Activities (Conservation of Habitats) Regulations 2001 (the “Habitats Regs”).

In a judgment handed down this week in R (Hynot Ltd) v SSESNZ [2025] EWHC 2644, following a half-day hearing, Saini J refused the Claimant group permission to proceed with its judicial review. The Judge found that:

1. The claim was not brought promptly given that this was a challenge to major infrastructure and there were no good reasons for failing to bring the claim more quickly. The previous position – that the promptness requirement was disapplied where EU-derived law was relied upon (see C-406/08 Uniplex [2010] 2 CMLR 47) - no longer applied following the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023, s5(A1) and (A4).
2. There was no breach of the EIA Regs. The Secretary of State properly considered the risks of major accidents and disasters and lawfully consulted on the further information provided by the Developer in respect of these. Further, it was rational and lawful for the Secretary of State not to consider, cumulatively, the emissions from a hydrogen production plant which was part of the wider Hynet Cluster but a separate and distinct project. Adopting the approach of the Supreme Court in R (Finch) v Surrey CC [2024] UKSC 30, emissions from the hydrogen production plant were not, as a matter of causation, effects of the Development.
3. There was no breach of the Habitats Regs. The Secretary of State arrived at a rational judgement following input from statutory consultees, two of which he ultimately disagreed with.

The judgment can be found here.