The Legal Officers (Annual Fees) Order 2026

The explanatory memorandum states that removing the £250,000 cap allows regulators to impose penalties that are proportionate to the degree of environmental harm and the financial benefit gained by the offender.

Proponents argue that the amendment ensures civil sanctions act as a sufficient deterrent against non-compliance by large corporate entities, particularly water companies.

The government asserts that the change aligns the civil penalty regime with the sentencing guidelines used in criminal courts, where fines for similar offences are often significantly higher.

The document indicates the order follows a public consultation which showed support for increasing the maximum penalty for serious environmental breaches.

Legal commentators have noted that the shift to uncapped civil penalties may lead to challenges regarding the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the ECHR, as high-value 'punitive' fines are traditionally the province of criminal courts.

Business representatives have expressed concerns regarding the lack of a fixed upper limit, which may create financial uncertainty and unpredictability for companies managing environmental risks.

Some environmental groups have questioned whether the Environment Agency has the resources or the expertise to handle the complex litigation that may follow the imposition of multi-million pound civil penalties.

Industry bodies have pointed out that the effectiveness of the change depends on future agency enforcement priorities and the consistent application of new penalty calculation guidance.