The High Court sealed an order on 19 June 2026 in the judicial review brought by Gatwick Airport Limited against the Secretary of State for Transport. The published judgment closed proceedings heard on 20 January 2026.

At the heart of the case was the Secretary of State's decision of 21 September 2025, which approved development consent for Gatwick's northern runway expansion. This Development Consent Order (a formal planning permission for major infrastructure) ended a planning process turbulent with legal and political setbacks stretching back more than ten years.

How we got here

The backstory matters. In February 2020, the Court of Appeal ruled the Airports National Policy Statement (the framework guiding aviation development decisions) unlawful and suspended it while the Government acted. That ruling came as debate over Heathrow's third runway dominated headlines, but applied equally to Gatwick. It left the airport without the policy foundation needed to apply for planning consent. The Government later confirmed the statement, Parliament endorsed it, and Gatwick's planning examination eventually produced the September 2025 approval.

Gatwick's challenge in January targeted that consent decision. The sealing of the court's order on 19 June formally closes the High Court phase, though the published judgment does not reveal whether the challenge succeeded or whether either side intends to appeal further.

The speed of the courts

The legal timetable here deserves attention. Challenges to Development Consent Orders must be filed within six weeks of the decision, and courts are required to work fast. A hearing date of 20 January — roughly four months after the September 2025 approval — fits the compressed timescale Parliament set for nationally significant infrastructure disputes. The case moved at approximately the pace intended.

Other parties were separately involved in related proceedings. Communities Against Gatwick Noise Emissions (CAGNE) and Peter Barclay appeared before the Secretary of State in transmission direction proceedings, according to a January 2026 judiciary record. The legal activity around the September 2025 consent reached beyond a single claimant or forum. Noise and environmental objections have remained consistent threads throughout Gatwick expansion litigation since the original policy statement.

The England factor

Aviation policy is Westminster's responsibility across all four nations. But a second runway at Gatwick would affect Surrey and West Sussex communities directly — both areas in England, outside the reach of Scotland's Parliament or Wales's Senedd. England's planning system applies a different level of public scrutiny than equivalent infrastructure would receive in Scotland or Wales, and this contrast remains a persistent tension in how major schemes are handled in the English regions.

What changes now

The September 2025 Development Consent Order now has legal force, subject to what the sealed judgment contains. For the airport, its investors, and the supply chains monitoring contractual trigger points, the High Court's decision removes one layer of legal uncertainty. The broader context here — the 2020 Court of Appeal ruling on the policy statement, the January hearing, and the June order — will likely interest both planning lawyers and the Department for Transport as they consider future reviews of aviation policy frameworks.