Britain’s decision to permit the export of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel, even though it acknowledged potential violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza, was deemed lawful by London’s High Court on Monday.
The legal challenge was brought by Al-Haq, an organization based in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, against the UK’s Department for Business and Trade. The case focused on the government’s choice to exclude F-35 parts from a suspension of certain arms export licences imposed last year.
The UK had determined that Israel was not fully adhering to international humanitarian law, particularly concerning access for aid and the treatment of detainees during its military operations following Hamas’s attack in October 2023.
Nonetheless, the UK opted to keep F-35 licences active, arguing that halting them would disrupt a global supply chain critical to the aircraft’s production, potentially affecting global security.
According to the Ministry of Defence, such disruption could weaken U.S. trust in the UK and NATO.
Al-Haq contended in a hearing last month that the government’s decision violated international law, including provisions under the Geneva Convention.
However, the High Court rejected the challenge in a written ruling, stating it was the only known UK legal case concerning arms sales to Israel.
Judges Stephen Males and Karen Steyn clarified that the case did not concern whether the UK should supply military equipment to Israel, but rather whether the judiciary could compel the government to exit the international F-35 programme—something ministers maintain is essential for national and international security.
They concluded that such politically sensitive matters fall under the authority of the executive, which is answerable to Parliament and the public, not the courts.
It remains uncertain whether Al-Haq will seek to appeal the decision.
