The government’s decision to press forward with Heathrow Airport expansion has been deemed unlawful.

Both Reading Borough Council (RBC) and West Berkshire Council backed plans for a third runway last year, though RBC included the caveat that sustainable transport to the airport must be provided first.

The court said the government did not take enough account of its commitment to the Paris Agreement on climate change when setting out its support for the expansion proposals.

In a summary of the ruling, Lord Justice Lindblom told a packed court: “The Paris Agreement ought to have been taken into account by the Secretary of State in the preparation of the NPS and an explanation given as to how it was taken into account, but it was not.”

READ MORE: The thirteen important buildings with local protection in Reading

Heathrow said it would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court and is ready to work with the government to fix the issue raised by the court.

A public consultation on Heathrow expansion ended on September 13.

This is what your councils had to say.

Reading Borough Council

Expansion was backed – but only if effective public transport to access the airport is provided first.

Transport and environment chief Tony Page said the council’s position recognises the economic and employment benefits to Reading from Heathrow and Gatwick airports.

He said Heathrow expansion offers “the strongest solution” to the UK’s aviation needs but “significant investment” in public transport infrastructure must come first.

Green councillors asked RBC to say “no way” Heathrow expansion which it called an “environmental disaster”.

Here is RBC’s response to the consultation in full:

 “RBC’s view is that there needs to be effective public transport access to the airport to minimise the negative impacts of current car assess, and the plans for airport expansion must include provision as a central part of the those plans.

“Current public transport links to Heathrow Airport are unacceptably inadequate and poor given the existing level of flight operations.

“The proportion of passengers currently using public transport to access Heathrow is among the lowest of any of the large comparable international airports.

“As the Davies Commission rightly said there is an immediate need for a range of public transport improvements covering buses, light and heavy rail and cycling.

“RBC strongly endorses this view and believes that it is wrong to therefore link the funding of projects such as the Western Rail link to Heathrow to future airport expansion when the need for such schemes is now.

“Improvements to public transport links to and within Heathrow must be in place well in advance of any possible expansion taking place in order to improve current accessibility let alone future demands.”

West Berkshire

The council voted to support the third runway on September 12, despite concerns about how the expansion would increase carbon emissions.

Conservative councillors argued that technology to tackle noise pollution “has seen huge advances”, and the new runway was essential for businesses to export.

Cllr Dennis Benneyworth (Con, Hungerford & Kintbury) said he needs Heathrow to fly horses as far away as Tokyo and Dubai. Cllr Lynne Doherty (Con, Speen), the leader of the council, said: “I don’t believe demonising the aviation industry is the right direction to take.”

Opposition councillors, in the Liberal Democrat and Green parties, were mostly against the expansion.

Liberal Democrat councillors argued that while it was a good thing for young people to be able to travel and explore the world, most flights are taken by business people who fly several times a year.

Green councillors questioned claims that the airport will be zero carbon. Cllr Carolyne Culver (Green, Ridgeway) said: “How is it possible for it to be zero carbon? Will they build a runway but not put any planes on it?”