nam 22 uu 4500 10.17176/20220325-001123-0 DE-Verfassungsblog cr||||| 220324s2022||||xx#|||||o|||| ||| 0|eng|| 10.17176/20220325-001123-0 doi eng 342 23 Markey-Towler, Rebekkah Author aut Climate Law as a ‘Living Tree’ - Reflections on Minister for the Environment v Sharma Markey-Towler, Rebekkah Verfassungsblog 2022-03-24 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Last year, the Australian decision of a Federal Court judge in Sharma v Minister for the Environment made headlines around the world. In the decision, the judge found that the Federal Environment Minister owed Australian children a duty of care to prevent harm from climate change. This year, the Sharma case has once again attracted attention, albeit for the opposite reason. In March 2022, the Full Court of the Federal Court allowed the Minister’s appeal and overturned the primary judge’s finding of a novel duty of care. This decision has emphasised the limits of legal concepts and courts in addressing future climate damages. However, the unfavourable outcome does not mark the end for climate litigation in Australia. CC BY-SA 4.0 Climate Crisis climate litigation Future rights Tort law Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH Verfassungsblog 2366-7044 https://verfassungsblog.de/climate-law-as-a-living-tree/ raw object