IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

Did the duty of the “Secretary of State” in section 13(1) of the Climate Change Act 2008 (“the Climate Change Act”) to “prepare such proposals and policies as the Secretary of State considers will enable the carbon budgets that have been set under this Act to be met” apply to the preparation by the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (“SSEFRA”) of the Government’s food strat. [...] Section 34, “Advice in connection with carbon budgets”, provides: “(1) It is the duty of the Committee to advise the Secretary of State, in relation to each budgetary period, on – (a) the level of the carbon budget for the period; (b) the extent to which the carbon budget for the period should be met – (i) by reducing the amount of net UK emissions of targeted greenhouse gases, or (ii) by the use. [...] said (in paragraph 202): “202 The statutory context is of paramount importance: … (iv) The CCA 2008 imposes the obligation to ensure that the net UK carbon account meets those targets solely on the Secretary of State; (v) Under the CCA 2008 the preparation of proposals and policies under s.13 … is critical to achieving those targets; (vi) The Act imposes solely on the Secretary of State the obliga. [...] noted that originally the Secretary of State was the king’s private secretary with the custody of the king’s signet, and was the ordinary channel of communication between the Sovereign and the subject. [...] This is, in truth, a criticism of DEFRA’s conduct in the process leading to the preparation of the Net Zero Strategy, and not a criticism of what it did in the course of preparing the Food Strategy, which is the subject-matter of the claim before us.