Gene-editing regulations face High Court remedy hearing

A legal challenge that could force changes to England’s gene-editing regime will return to the High Court next month after a judge ruled ministers were wrongly advised over their powers to require labelling and traceability for precision-bred organisms (PBOs).

A remedy hearing is scheduled in London on Thursday, 12 November to determine what action should follow a June ruling that found the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Regulations 2025 had been made unlawfully.

On 4 June, Mr Justice Johnson ruled that the farming minister at that time, Daniel Zeichner, had been incorrectly advised that the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023 did not allow provisions for mandatory labelling and supply-chain traceability of PBOs.

See also: Minister misled on gene editing labelling rules

The judge found that advice was wrong and concluded the decision to make the regulations on that basis was irrational and unlawful. However, he rejected the claimants’ other grounds, including arguments based on human rights and environmental law.

The court has yet to decide on a remedy and whether any part of the regulatory framework should be amended or quashed.

“We believe the regulations should be quashed,” said lead claimant Pat Thomas of Beyond GM.

She said Defra had continued to approve environmental releases and issue marketing notices for PBOs since the ruling, despite uncertainty over the future of the regulations.

Co-claimant Patrick Holden, an organic dairy farmer based in Ceredigion, founder and chief executive of the Sustainable Food Trust, said the case had resonated with consumers concerned about transparency in the food chain.

“This is much, much bigger than whether I’m an organic farmer or want to eat organic food,” he said. “It’s the right of anybody to know.”

A CrowdJustice appeal launched to support the legal challenge has raised more than £90,000 towards legal costs.

Scotland and Wales continue to regulate PBOs under existing genetically modified organism (GMO) rules, while organic standards also classify them as GMOs.

Beyond GM argues that the lack of mandatory labelling and traceability places an unfair burden on organic and non-GM supply chains, which must shoulder the cost of avoiding PBOs.

England-only regime

Ms Thomas dismissed government claims that the ruling and any potential remedy had created uncertainty for the biotechnology sector.

“The ruling simply exposed the uncertainties the government created by implementing a regime that is only operational in England,” she said.

She added that the claimants are pursuing a second legal challenge against Defra, although details have not yet been made public.

Defra maintains that precision breeding could help improve food security, reduce pesticide use and increase crop yields by accelerating the development of crops with beneficial traits.