High Court ruling on gene editing puts SPS deal at risk

Government negotiators seeking a “carve out” in ongoing EU-alignment talks to allow the continued development of gene-edited crops could be on the back foot following a recent High Court ruling.

New precision breeding regulations for England, effective since November 2025, have allowed researchers to press on with field trials of gene-edited crops.

While the EU seems to be heading in the same direction, it is not there yet, and Defra is keen to secure a concession in any sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) deal to allow the research to continue.

However, a new High Court ruling has put this objective in some jeopardy.

See also: Gene editing gathers momentum with field trials and new approval

‘Unlawful’

The case, brought by campaign group Beyond GM, has concluded that the current UK precision breeding regulations are unlawful.

In particular, the judge Mr Justice Johnson found that the Defra farming minister drawing up the regulations had been given incorrect advice about the need for labelling and traceability of gene-edited material.

As such, his decision to leave out any such provision from the regulations was “irrational”, and therefore “unlawful”.

Further court proceedings are needed to ascertain what action Defra now needs to take.

But with a question mark hanging over the regulations, it is feared the EU Commission will be less inclined to grant the UK government an exemption from EU law as part of any SPS deal.

“If a carve out is not possible, the UK regime will have to be revised to align with EU rules,” said a spokesman for Beyond GM.

‘Under the bus’

Oxfordshire farmer Tom Allen-Stevens, whose British On-Farm Innovation Network is carrying out field trials of gene-edited barley, said any failure to secure a “carve out” from EU rules would jeopardise all the work undertaken so far.

“That is when millions of pounds worth of Defra-funded research gets thrown under the bus,” he said.

The irony was that the food industry has never been opposed to labelling and traceability, he added.

Yet the new court case is likely to have the reverse effect, as further research into gene-edited crops will increasingly move overseas and be done behind closed doors, with the results kept from public view.

Prof Nigel Halford, principle research scientist at Rothamsted, agreed that the judicial review had created more delay and uncertainty, including for the SPS negotiations.

“Precision-bred crops are now on the market in many parts of the world and the UK risks being left behind,” he said.

“Most countries that grow precision-bred crops do not require traceability or labelling, meaning that enforcing labelling laws for imported products would be impossible.

“The broad scientific consensus around the world is that the sorts of genetic changes introduced by precision breeding are the same as those that occur naturally.”

Defra comment

A government spokesperson said officials were clear that precision breeding offers a huge potential “to boost food security, cut pesticide use, increase crop yields and enhance disease resistance”.  

“The EU has accepted that there needs to be a number of areas where we need to retain our own rules.

“We are negotiating those now and won’t provide a running commentary on negotiations.”

Government officials told a recent AHDB export conference that an SPS deal should be concluded by 13 July – the date of the next UK-EU summit.