I will start by answering your question, and ask Mr. Chapman to add to it perhaps.
The joint review panel had looked at the issue of greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. The judge decided there was inadequate justification for the conclusion that the impacts of these two considerations would not be significant. There was no detailed justification given in the panel's report.
In the end, the panel reviewed these issues and backed up its findings with some justifications. This included, among other things, information that was submitted to the original panel, most of which came from the proponent. So this aspect was taken into account.
At the outset, the judge found that the report did not contain enough justification, but that does not mean the information was not available.
In the end, the report was revised and information was added to it. Finally, the report was submitted to cabinet for approval. I must add that the final decision is not made by our agency.