Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Greenpeace loses court fight over illegal timber

John Aston
Friday 26 July 2002 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Greenpeace reacted with dismay yesterday after losing a legal battle which, it says, leaves the way open for Amazonian rainforest timber cut down illegally to be imported into the UK.

The environmental group had asked the Court of Appeal to rule that the Government had the power to stop specific shipments of mahogany from Brazil under international law. It argued that, even though export permits had been obtained for the timber, the British government knew the Brazilian environmental authorities were opposed to its shipment and should act.

But, in a 2-1 majority decision, Lord Justice Mummery and Lord Justice Dyson decided that the need for "commercial certainty" for traders meant the UK authorities were entitled to accept the export permits as valid and not interfere.

In a dissenting judgment, Lord Justice Laws said he would have ruled that, as the UK knew that the Brazilian management authority was "not satisfied" that shipments were being traded "in accordance with the Convention" (on International Trade in Endangered Species), the permits should be rejected.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in