Minister misled on gene editing labelling rules

A High Court judge has ruled that ministers were wrongly advised about their powers to introduce labelling and traceability requirements for gene-edited products when developing England’s precision breeding regulations.

In a judgment handed down on 4 June (opens in PDF), Mr Justice Johnson found that ministers proceeded on the mistaken belief that the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023 did not allow mandatory labelling of precision-bred organisms (PBOs).

The court found that the act did contain powers broad enough to support such measures through its provisions on traceability.

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

The challenge was brought by campaign group Beyond GM, organic farmers Patrick Holden and Joseph Wookey, and food journalist Joanna Blythman.

Mr Justice Johnson found that then farming minister Daniel Zeichner proceeded on “the erroneous basis” that he lacked the power to require mandatory labelling.

The court found that ministers were repeatedly advised that the Act did not permit mandatory labelling, when in fact its traceability provisions were broad enough to support such requirements.

As a result, the option was never fully considered when the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Regulations 2025 were developed.

The regulations were made in May 2025 and came into force in November 2025 as part of the government’s post-Brexit framework for regulating gene-edited plants and food products in England.

Other claims rejected

The court rejected the claimants’ other grounds of challenge, including arguments based on human rights and environmental law.

The judgment also accepted that the absence of mandatory labelling and traceability makes it significantly more difficult for organic and non-GM businesses to identify and exclude precision-bred products from their supply chains, and could create additional challenges for exports to the EU and Northern Ireland.

However, the judge found that maintaining separate supply chains remains possible despite the added burden.

What happens next?

The ruling leaves the government facing questions over whether the issue of labelling and traceability must now be reconsidered.

The judge has not yet decided what remedy should follow and has invited further submissions from both sides before making that decision.

A Defra spokesman said: “We are clear that precision breeding offers a huge potential to boost food security, cut pesticide use, increase crop yields and enhance disease resistance.

“We will consider the court’s decision carefully and respond in due course.”