You will read the summary of a case study then you must write the correct form of the words in CAPITAL letters. TA S5

The claimant brought a judicial review challenging the council’s APPROVE (2 p.) of a new oil drilling site, arguing the environmental impact had been underestimated. The Court considered whether the council had fulfilled its OBLIGE (2 p.) under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations. A key issue was whether indirect greenhouse gas emissions were sufficiently ACCOUNT (2 p.) for in the environmental statement. The claimant argued that the local authority’s decision-making was legally DEFECT (2 p.) , amounting to an error of law.

The Supreme Court provided clarity on the APPLY (2 p.) of environmental duties to downstream emissions. In a 3–2 majority ruling, the Court held that such emissions were not within the FORESEE (2 p.) scope of the planning authority’s duty. The dissenting justices warned that this narrow interpretation could lead to UNDERMINE (2 p.) of environmental safeguards.

The judgment reinforced the principle of PROPORTION (2 p.) in evaluating statutory duties under public law. Procedural fairness and lawful DETERMINE (2 p.) were central to the claimant’s submissions. Legal commentators noted the case may trigger further LEGISLATE (2 p.) reform to address gaps in environmental oversight.