This case analysis considers the Court of Appeal’s decision in R (Plan B Earth and ors) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWCA Civ 214, which followed the High Court challenge to the Secretary of State’s designation of the UK Airports National Policy Statement The Court of Appeal found that the Secretary of State’s failure to take into account the UK’s commitment to the Paris Agreement when carrying out his duties under the Planning Act 2008 was unlawful While permission to appeal this decision has been granted, it remains a notable judgment The Plan B Earth case confirms the interaction between the UK’s climate change commitments and the statutory framework of the UK’s planning system It also highlights the complexity of the Court’s institutional role in the context of environmental problems Analysing the implications of this decision through a policymaking lens risks overlooking the role of public law principles that shaped the Court’s reasoning, defining the relationship between the Paris Agreement and the Planning Act

中文翻译：

---

Plan B Earth 诉交通大臣：机场扩建、巴黎协定和 2008 年规划法

本案例分析考虑了上诉法院在 R（Plan B Earth and ors）诉运输大臣 [2020] EWCA Civ 214 中的裁决，该裁决是在高等法院对英国机场国家政策声明的指定提出质疑之后上诉法院裁定，国务卿在根据 2008 年规划法履行职责时未考虑英国对巴黎协定的承诺是非法的，虽然已批准对这一决定提出上诉，它仍然是一个值得注意的判决 地球计划 B 案证实了英国的气候变化承诺与英国规划体系的法定框架之间的相互作用 它还突出了法院在环境问题背景下的机构作用的复杂性 分析了这一决定的影响通过政策制定的视角，可能会忽视公法原则的作用，这些原则塑造了法院的推理，定义了《巴黎协定》和《规划法》之间的关系