Sun shines on the righteous

12th February 2012


Related Topics

Related tags

  • Central government ,
  • Energy ,
  • Renewable ,
  • Generation



Stephen Tromans reminds us that the government must always act lawfully when changing the rules

Much modern environmental law involves the government trying to influence markets and modify market behaviour. The use of such techniques can be traced back to the landfill tax of the mid-1990s, through to the proposed Green Deal. But the government must act lawfully when setting and modifying such rules, otherwise the players in the market may be unfairly impacted.

This is well exemplified by the decision of Justice Mitting in the case of small solar energy systems, decided a few days before Christmas: R (Homesun Holdings Limited, Solar Century Holdings and Friends of the Earth) v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (Administrative Court, 21 December 2011), which was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in January.

It is well known that the government introduced, from 1 April 2010, a system of feed-in tariffs to encourage the installation of photovoltaic solar panels with no more than four kilowatt hours capacity. The scheme requires licensed electricity suppliers to pay money for the next 25 years to owners of such systems for the electricity generated.

On the basis that what the secretary of state (in this case Chris Huhne) giveth, the secretary of state can also taketh away, Huhne then proposed in a consultation the reduction of that benefit, which would apply to systems installed before the end of the consultation period.

This proposal was successfully attacked as unlawful by Friends of the Earth, and by companies in the solar energy market. Essentially, the decision turned on three legal issues. First, whether a proposal to change the law could be the subject of challenge in the courts at all. It was held that it could, particularly, as in this case, the secretary of state was proposing to make an executive decision, as opposed to parliament proposing to enact primary legislation, and where (as here) the very making of the proposal would have an immediate and significant effect on the market.

Second, as a strict point of law, whether the secretary of state had the power to make the change. And, third, even if Huhne did have such a power, this was retrospective legislation, as it would have an adverse retrospective effect on solar systems installed after 12 December 2011, halving the tariff they would receive from 1 April 2012 – a significant adverse impact on those proposing to install systems before the date on which the modification took effect. Such changes would not, the judge found, further the statutory purpose of encouraging small-scale, low-carbon generation of electricity. Rather, they would undermine consumer confidence.

The reason given for prompting the proposed change was that the cost of small solar systems had fallen by about 30% – from approximately £13,000 to £9,000 – and the price of electricity had risen, affecting the original assumptions underlying the scheme, and making it unduly favourable to small-scale generators, which in turn had led to the scheme taking off at a much higher rate than foreseen.

The proposal, as Justice Mitting put it, “inevitably caused dismay in the industry which has grown up to supply and install small solar systems and amongst community organisations which proposed to install small solar systems in social housing schemes, village halls and schools.”

The government subsequently appealed. The Court of Appeal upheld the original ruling, stating that: “The question [is] whether parliament conferred a power [to DECC] to make a modification with such a retrospective effect. It did not.”

But to some extent the ultimate outcome is not what is important. The key message that comes out is that the government is now, in many areas of the environment and energy field, taking decisions in terms of programmes and policies that have a direct and immediate effect on commercial activity, investment, and company plans.

Decisions on matters such as the use of biofuels and support for particular types of low-carbon energy, for example, all have that effect. Indeed, it is inevitable in systems where government seeks to work through, rather than above, the market. But as this case shows, it is not always possible to get it right initially, and for every winner there is a loser.

The sums paid by the energy suppliers to the owners of the rooftop solar energy systems do not come out of thin air – they come out of the tariffs charged to other, quite probably much poorer, consumers. Low-carbon generation comes at a cost. The question is, who bears it? This case highlights the critical importance of getting those rules right in the first place.


Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.

Transform articles

Latest environmental legislation round-up

Regulatory gaps between the EU and UK are beginning to appear, warns Neil Howe in this edition’s environmental legislation round-up

4th April 2024

Read more

Dr Julie Riggs issues a call to arms to tackle a modern-day human tragedy

15th March 2024

Read more

The UK’s new biodiversity net gain (BNG) requirements could create 15,000 hectares of woodlands, heath, grasslands, and wetlands and absorb 650,000 tonnes of carbon each year.

13th March 2024

Read more

Campaign group Wild Justice has accused the UK government of trying to relax pollution rules for housebuilders “through the backdoor”.

14th February 2024

Read more

Digital tracking, packaging data delays and new collections provide a waste focus for this edition’s environmental round-up by legislation expert Neil Howe

28th November 2023

Read more

Environmental crimes could result in prison sentences of up to 10 years and company fines of 5% of turnover under a proposed EU law agreed by the European parliament and council.

21st November 2023

Read more

Stuart McLachlan and Dean Sanders discuss their book: The Adventure of Sustainable Performance: Beyond ESG Compliance to Leadership in the New Era.

14th November 2023

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close