The Blue Marine Foundation will appeal a ruling by the UK’s High Court that dismissed its challenge to the government’s fishing quota allocation system, which the conservation group claims has led to the collapse of fish populations and the decline of coastal communities.
Blue Marine went to court at the start of March 2025 to argue it was an irresponsible use of national assets and against the interests of the majority of fishers.
The case pivoted on the determination of fishing opportunities for UK fishing boats, made under sections 23 and 24 of the Fisheries Act 2020, which the claimant argued was irrational and failed to adhere to relevant scientific advice and policies.
The arguments
The Fisheries Act 2020 requires the Secretary of State to determine fishing opportunities in a manner that complies with international obligations and considers scientific advice, economic impact and the views of several stakeholders.
The claimant maintained that Secretary of State acted irrationally by not adequately considering ICES advice and unlawfully fettered his discretion by treating the outcome of international negotiations as binding.
Countering, the Secretary of State argued that the determination was indeed thorough and made only after a comprehensive process that balanced scientific advice, economic considerations and stakeholder input.
The decision
Mrs Justice Lang upheld the Secretary of State’s determination, finding that the decision-making process was rational and in line with the statutory framework, while also noting that the Fisheries Act 2020 and the Joint Fisheries Statement require a balanced approach that considers scientific advice alongside economic and social factors.
The judge further determined that the scientific advice from ICES was given due consideration, agreeing with the defence that the government needed to account for the economic viability of the fishing industry and the socio-economic impacts on coastal communities. She therefore found that the Secretary of State’s decision to deviate from ICES advice in certain cases was justified by the need to balance sustainability with economic and social objectives.
Mrs Justice Lang concluded that the Secretary of State’s determination was a result of “a thorough and careful assessment of the issues”. She dismissed the Blue Marine Foundation’s application for judicial review, affirming the legality of the determination and emphasising the importance of a balancing competing interests when dealing with the management of fisheries.
Reaction and appeal
A spokesperson for the UK government’s Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said: “We welcome the judgement. Sustainability has always been at the heart of the UK’s approach to setting catch limits, and we have fully complied with our obligations under the Fisheries Act 2020 and the Joint Fisheries Statement.”
“We are pleased the judge has dismissed this claim, and we will continue to support the UK fishing industry by delivering world-class, sustainable management of our sea fisheries.”
The Charity responded to the decision by saying, “Is it right or legal that the entire adult spawning stock of a fish can be sacrificed, just so the fishing fleet can go on fishing for other species?” said Charles Clover, co-founder of Blue Marine. “This judgment has condoned irresponsibility.”
Tom Appleby, head of legal affairs at Blue Marine said: “This is a challenging day for the health of our seas and for jobs in what’s left of the UK fishing industry.
“This year, yet again, despite explicit policies to the contrary, fishing quotas for 54% of species failed the government’s own metrics for sustainability – including quotas for staple stocks such as mackerel. The continuation of these sorts of decisions, year on year, has collapsed cod, whiting and now pollack – the last major stock on which the inshore fleet depended.
“We have lost nearly 30% of the jobs in the fishing industry since 2016, as a direct result of decisions like these. The UK is now down to around 6,500 active full-time jobs. The entire industry would fit into the Dover Athletic football stadium.
“Without fish there are no fishermen. We have no doubt that our next duty is to appeal this decision. These practices cannot be permitted to continue.”