03 December 2024
The Return of Not-Quite “Phantom Experts”?
On Monday, 2 December 2024, the much anticipated hearing began in the Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change advisory proceedings before the International Court of Justice. Less than a week before the start of the hearing, the Court issued a brief and unusual press release about a meeting that it held with scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The Court’s decision to meet privately with the scientists raises questions about the Court’s procedures and its approach to evidence. Above all, it is unclear why the Court decided to consult with the IPCC scientists in a closed meeting rather than eliciting testimony from these individuals as part of the formal, public hearing. Continue reading >>
0 
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 >>12 September 2024
The Future of the European Green Deal
With the European Green Deal, the Commission has successfully presented a concept for improving climate, biodiversity, and environmental protection in line with Art. 11 TFEU. Most measures proposed by the Commission since 2019 have been adopted by the European Parliament (EP) and Council. However, the focus now shifts to implementation and application, where member states bear primary responsibility. "Law in the books" must become "law in action". Continue reading >>14 July 2024
“Displacement due to environmental factors is one of the great tragedies of our time”
In a recent judgment, the Colombian Constitutional Court has ruled that displacement due to environmental factors can be legally considered as forced displacement triggering specific obligations of the State. The judgment (T-123 of 2024) highlights the deficit of constitutional protection for victims of environmental displacement, urging the state to develop specific strategies to address this issue. In this interview, Natalia Ángel-Cabo, a Judge at the Colombian Constitutional Court, explains the implications of the ruling and the concept of displacement due to environmental factors. Continue reading >>27 June 2024
A Global South Perspective on Loss and Damage Litigation
In June 2024, delegates undertook two-week-long negotiations at the UNFCCC Bonn Climate Change Conference. These meetings concerned the modalities of the newly instituted Loss and Damage (L&D) Fund and the provision of financial assistance to developing countries. In this piece, we reflect on the future interactions between the L&D Fund and litigations regarding L&D. We argue that these two phenomena must be seen as having a synergistic relation, effectively benefitting the Global South. Continue reading >>
0
20 June 2024
Downstream Emissions as Climate Impacts
In a 3-2 majority, the UK Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling today, significantly impacting the consideration of climate impacts in the oil and gas licensing process. While the Government’s approach so far has been to only consider exploration and production emissions, the Court’s decision establishes that emissions resulting from burning the produced oil and gas (regardless of where it occurs) have to also be considered. The ruling is significant as it is the first highest court decision to adopt this interpretation on climate impacts of fossil fuel production. It will no doubt have a knock-on effect on at least three other cases pending before lower courts in the UK, and potentially affect cases both within and outside the European Union. Continue reading >>
0
16 June 2024
‘Relevant Rules’ as Normative Environment
On 21 May 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) delivered its much anticipated Advisory Opinion on Climate Change. This post zeroes in on one particular interpretative issue, and its wider ramifications for the development of international law, namely the Tribunal’s approach to Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) (which enshrines the principle of systemic integration) in connection with the interpretation of UNCLOS. Although ITLOS did not elaborate in detail on its approach, as can be seen from its entire analysis, the Tribunal has demonstrated a clear and principled choice with respect to the content and application of Article 31(3)(c) VCLT and its customary counterpart. Continue reading >>
0
07 June 2024
More than a Sink
The difference between treating the oceans as a mere sink versus protecting them as a vital part of the environment has important implications under international law. These implications come to the fore when considering the relationship between the UNCLOS on the one hand and the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement on the other. While the latter treaties in no way legitimize pollution of the marine environment, their focus on oceans as sinks could be misinterpreted to deprive UNCLOS and the customary rules it codifies of a meaningful role in addressing climate change. Continue reading >>
0