Campaigners against the Gatwick Airport expansion have lost their bid to appeal a lower court's decision in the Court of Appeal, with two senior judges dismissing their claims as "unarguable". The £2.2bn expansion will allow 100,000 more flights per year at the UK's second busiest airport. The campaigners, led by Peter Barclay and group Cagne, had claimed that the government did not properly assess the climate impact of the scheme, but the judges said the previous ruling was "detailed and thorough". The court's decision brings an end to an eight-year planning and legal process over the expansion plans.
Written by the local model on 2026-08-21,
using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the
same event (that is the story summary below).
Story summary
Campaigners against the expansion of Gatwick Airport have lost their bid to take their case to the Court of Appeal. The £2.2bn expansion would see the airport's emergency runway moved 12m north to accommodate 100,000 more flights per year. Last month, campaigners Peter Barclay and Communities Against Gatwick Noise Emissions (Cagne) asked the Court of Appeal to reconsider their case, but their appeal was denied. The original decision to approve the expansion was made in June by Mr Justice Mould, who ruled that the government's assessment of climate impact was sufficient. He also rejected an argument that the expansion was unnecessary due to its proximity to Heathrow Airport.
Written for “Gatwick Airport Expansion Dispute” on 2026-08-31,
grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
The article uses neutral language when reporting the opinions of both the campaigners and Gatwick's CEO, but the framing of the story suggests a slight bias towards the airport expansion. The phrase 'immensely proud' in the quote from Cagne implies a positive spin on their efforts to hold Gatwick accountable, which is not balanced by a similar emphasis on the negative impacts of the expansion.
Written under an earlier scoring contract, which gave a paragraph
rather than checkable quotes. Re-analysing this article replaces it.
Leaning score +0.75 for article 477 · logged 2026-08-05
- Published
Campaigners have lost a bid to take their legal fight against the government over plans for a two-runway operation at Gatwick Airport to the Court of Appeal.
asserted
Campaigners → publish → Appeal
Peter Barclay and campaign group Communities Against Gatwick Noise Emissions (Cagne) previously took legal action against the Department for Transport over the decision to approve the plans, including over claims that the government did not properly assess the climate impact of the scheme.
uncertain
government → take → scheme
Cagne and Barclay told a hearing in January the scheme was unlawful, claiming climate impact was not properly assessed.
asserted
impact → tell → January
The £2.2bn expansion will see the West Sussex airport move its emergency runway 12m (39ft) north to allow 100,000 more flights a year.
asserted
airport → see → flights
Mr Justice Mould dismissed the challenges to the airport's expansion in June, finding that it was "neither illogical nor contradictory" for Alexander not to refuse the proposed development "on the basis that it would have a material impact on the ability of Government to meet its carbon reduction targets".
asserted
it → dismiss → targets
He also rejected an argument about the need for the expansion at Gatwick, given the proximity to Heathrow.
asserted
He → reject → Heathrow
Last month, Barclay and Cagne asked the Court of Appeal to allow them to challenge the ruling, claiming that the judge was wrong.
asserted
judge → ask → ruling
But in a ruling on Tuesday, Lord Justice Holgate and Lord Justice Dove dismissed the appeal bids.
asserted
Holgate → dismiss → bids
In a 29-page ruling, they said: "We conclude that each of the grounds of appeal raised by each appellant is unarguable.
"
asserted
each → say → appellant
Neither appeal has a real prospect of success.
asserted
appeal → have → success
We also consider that there are no other compelling reasons for either appeal to be heard."
asserted
appeal → consider → ?
The two senior judges also said that the previous ruling was "detailed and thorough".
asserted
ruling → say → ?
The expansion will allow the site to be used for the departures of narrow-bodied planes such as Airbus A320s and Boeing 737s.
asserted
site → allow → A320s
Following the decision, Barclay said: "We are very disappointed with the Court's decision.
asserted
We → follow → decision
We took this challenge as far as we could because we believed that the decision to allow Gatwick to expand was fundamentally flawed.
uncertain
Gatwick → take → challenge
It was not supported by government policy, would only serve to line the pockets of the airport and airlines, and would do so at the expense of local residents and the climate."
asserted
It → support → residents
Cagne said: "Residents should be immensely proud of what they have achieved in holding Gatwick Airport's shareholders to account.
asserted
they → say → account
"This proposed new runway will come at a significant cost to both the taxpayer and the planet."
asserted
runway → propose → taxpayer
Pierre-Hugues Schmit, chief executive of London Gatwick, said the decision to approve the plans "was taken properly and lawfully".
asserted
decision → say → plans
He added: "We are also very pleased that this ruling, from senior Court of Appeal Judges, brings to an end an eight-year planning and legal process which has carefully tested and scrutinised every aspect of our expansion plans on multiple occasions.
asserted
which → add → occasions
"This final ruling means that we can now press on with the important job of bringing this exciting project to life and move forward into the design and delivery phase."
asserted
we → mean → phase
Schmit said the Northern Runway project was expected to deliver 14,000 new jobs and a £1bn boost to the economy every year.
asserted
project → say → economy
