Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“What I spend on my yearly subscription, equals to a day's billable hours for me not to mention time efficiency and peace of mind.”

Jai Stern

Access all documents on GDF

GDF meaning

Published by a LexisNexis Energy expert
What does GDF mean?
GDF (geological disposal facility) describes, in practice, an engineered underground repository for the permanent disposal of higher-activity radioactive (nuclear) waste. It uses a multi-barrier system: engineered seals and the host rock’s geology to contain radioactivity and protect the waste from surface disturbance. “Depth” includes vertical emplacement and lateral siting (for example, into a mountainside). The term is widely used in UK policy and regulation and appears in planning legislation; it is not a judicially defined term of art. In England, a GDF is a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project under the Planning Act 2008, requiring a Development Consent Order (see the Infrastructure Planning (Radioactive Waste Geological Disposal Facilities) Order 2015). Consenting in Wales is devolved; Welsh Government policy supports geological disposal and operates a distinct consenting route. Scotland’s policy does not support geological disposal, favouring near-surface, near-site management. Northern Ireland and Ireland have no current siting proposals; the term is used descriptively in radioactive waste regulation (in Ireland within the framework of Directive 2011/70/Euratom). In practice, GDF issues arise in nuclear licensing, environmental permitting, planning/EIA, land acquisition, community consent arrangements and long-term liability. Regulators typically include the Office for Nuclear Regulation and the relevant environmental regulator.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about GDF

NEWS
UK and EU financial services weekly briefing—prudential, conduct, consumer protection, sanctions, enforcement, ESG, banks, funds, insurance, pensions, fintech/crypto, MiCA and MiFID II (6 March 2025)

In this issue: Prudential requirements Risk management and controls Financial crime and sanctions Consumer protection Conduct requirements Complaints, compensation and claims management Investigations, enforcement and discipline Sustainable finance and ESG Banks and mutuals Investment funds and asset management MiFID II Regulation of insurance FSMA regulated pensions activity Fintech and cryptoassets LexTalk®Financial Services: a Lexis®Nexis community Financial Services Enforcement Database Daily and weekly news alerts Intraday news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Prudential requirements CP2/25: PRA consults on leverage ratio threshold changes The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) has issued consultation paper CP2/25 setting out proposed revisions to leverage ratio thresholds. It plans to raise the retail deposits leverage threshold from £50bn to £70bn, aligning with nominal GDP growth since 2016. The intention is to keep major UK banks, building societies and investment firms within scope, while giving smaller firms additional...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about GDF

PRACTICE NOTES
CJEU annuls Commission’s 2018 Engie/Luxembourg tax ruling State aid decision: no correspondence principle; anti-abuse non-application not selective; Member States’ fiscal autonomy reaffirmed

CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub sets out the position as at the judgment date of 5 December 2023; it is no longer being updated. See the timeline for more details. Case facts Outline Appeals contesting the General Court’s judgment in Case T-516/18, which rejected an action seeking to annul the Commission’s decision of 20 June 2018. That decision concluded Luxembourg had provided unlawful State aid to Engie (formerly GDF Suez) through improper tax advantages (SA.44888). Latest developments On 5 December 2023, the Court of Justice delivered its ruling, allowing the appeal and annulling the Commission’s decision of 20 June 2018...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
EU General Court upholds Commission’s Engie/Luxembourg State aid decision; tax rulings selective via abuse-of-law non-application; economic reality over form; €120m recovery.

CASE HUB NOTE-appeals lodged before the Court of Justice in Cases C- 451/21 C- 454/21 ARCHIVED This archived case hub captures the position as at the judgment of 12 May 2021 and is no longer being updated. See the timeline for further details. Case facts Outline Joined Cases T- 516/18 Luxembourg v Commission and T- 525/18 Engie Global LNG Holdings and Others-applications for annulment before the General Court of the European Commission’s decision of 20 June 2018, which concluded that Luxembourg had provided unlawful State aid to Engie (formerly GDF Suez) through undue tax advantages (SA.44888). Latest development On 12 May 2021, the General Court issued its ruling, dismissing the actions in their entirety. It determined that the Commission was entitled to: (i) prioritise the economic reality of the intra-group structure over a purely formal approach; and (ii) find that a selective advantage existed, giving rise to State aid, due to the non-application of national provisions on abuse of law. Parties Applicants: ...

Read More Right Arrow