15 November 2024
Into Reverse Gear
The recent Hague Court of Appeal judgment, in the appeal brought by Shell against the first instance decision in favour of the NGO Milieudefensie, held that Shell is legally obliged to reduce its scope 3 emissions, but did not order Shell to reduce them by 45%, or indeed any percentage. The judgment is likely to have a significant impact on climate change litigation against corporations beyond just the Netherlands. That impact will be all the greater if the losing parties, Milieudefensie and others, do not appeal. Continue reading >>
0 
15 November 2024
Towards a Bundle of Duties
This week’s decision in Shell v Milieudefensie from the Hague Court of Appeals seemed like a blow to climate litigation: Milieudefensie was ultimately unsuccessful in convincing the Court that it could transpose a global requirement for 45% emissions reductions by 2030 into an obligation for a particular actor. Yet, the Court of Appeals decision marks considerable progress in how we understand the civil liability of large Dutch economic actors for their contributions to climate change. Continue reading >>
0
12 November 2024
Lessons of a Landmark Lost
On 12 November 2024, the Hague Court of Appeal in Shell v Milieudefensie set aside the preceding 2021 judgment which held Shell responsible for its contribution to climate change. The 2021 judgment was widely heralded (though also critiqued) as groundbreaking and a precedent that could be followed elsewhere. While the Appeal judgment is unlikely to receive similar praise from climate activists, it contains important lessons regarding the responsibility of multinational companies for their contributions to climate change. Continue reading >>09 October 2024
And, of course, Climate Change
Scholarly debates on climate change law in general and climate change litigation more specifically and the recent LPE debates mutually enrich each other. Surprisingly, the interaction of those two fields of study – while evoked frequently – remains underdeveloped. Continue reading >>
0
03 October 2022
Rising Before Sinking
On 22 September 2022, just one day before global climate protests took place in around 450 locations, the UN Human Rights Committee (Committee) has published its landmark decision in the case Daniel Billy et al. v. Australia. In casu, the Committee found that Australia failed to adequately protect members of an indigenous community present in four small, low-lying islands in the Torres Strait region from adverse impacts of climate change, which resulted in the violation of the complainants’ rights to enjoy their culture (Art. 27 ICPPR) and to be free from arbitrary interferences with their private life, family and home (Art. 17 ICCPR). The Committee thereby issued the first decision at the international level to tackle substantive human rights questions in the context of climate change that relate to the current situation of small islands and their indigenous inhabitants. Continue reading >>
0
28 July 2022
Net Zero, Full Transparency
Earlier this month, during a record-breaking heatwave and a Conservative party leadership contest that will determine the next UK Prime Minister, the High Court quietly issued a judgment that may have nearly as much impact on the course of UK climate policy over the coming decades than either of the other events. The High Court judgement in the Net Zero Strategy legal challenge can be considered a landmark victory. On the one hand, the case can be understood as a narrow administrative law challenge to the process by which a government decision was made. On the other hand, however, the judgment can be understood in the context of a growing number of cases around the world which demonstrate the critical role of the law and the courts in creating accountability for climate action – something that is increasingly vital in the face of a warming world and a lack of public trust in key institutions. Continue reading >>
0