09 April 2024
Historic and Unprecedented
The three much-awaited judgments rendered by the European Court of Human Rights on 9 April 2024 are truly historic and unprecedented. In Verein Klimaseniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland, the Grand Chamber established that climate change is 'one of the most pressing issues of our times' and poses a threat to human rights. With this ruling, the Court confirmed that States have a positive obligation to adopt measures to mitigate climate change under Article 8 ECHR, the right to family and private life. The judgments will undeniably set the tone for climate litigation in the years to come. It will impact both litigation and other procedures before other international courts. Continue reading >>
1 
09 April 2024
The Transformation of European Climate Change Litigation
In a transformative moment for European and global climate litigation, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled today that the state has a positive duty to adopt, and effectively implement in practice, regulations and measures capable of mitigating the existing and potentially irreversible future effects of climate change. In Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland (“KlimaSeniorinnen”), the Court held that by failing to put in place a domestic regulatory framework for climate change mitigation, the Swiss government violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the right to respect for private and family life. The judgment is a milestone for human rights protection. Continue reading >>17 March 2024
Tort Law and New Zealand’s Corporate Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In February 2024, the New Zealand Supreme Court overturned the previous strike outs in the case of Michael John Smith in tort against seven major New Zealand companies in the dairy, energy, steel, mining and infrastructure sectors. Smith asserts that the respondents are engaging in conduct that affects him and others, and has put them into legal connection with one another in ways that enable appropriate remedy. This is heartland common law territory. Even though the climate change problems we are now grappling with may be new ones, the centuries-old practices and traditions of the common law are a part of New Zealand’s constitutional heritage and structure. Litigation is a legitimate vehicle for members of the population to engage the law in the face of harm or threats to individuals’ rights and well-being. Continue reading >>
0
12 March 2024
Why Courts will not Stop Global Warming, but Climate Litigation is Still Useful
Despite the global trend of record temperatures and the increasing number of disasters caused by extreme weather events, the political impetus to combat global warming is weakening all over Europe. Not only far-right forces want to stop ambitious climate policy, but also other political parties tend to neglect this field. To counter those political forces, climate litigation tries to hold national governments accountable to their goals as enshrined in the Paris Agreement. Courts represent one of the arenas in the struggle for climate protection. However, the battle is ultimately won or lost in the legislative arena. Continue reading >>
0
27 February 2024
Chasing Shadows
The Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA) was touted as the European Union’s big response to the US Inflation Reduction Act. A year ago, the Biden administration’s new green subsidy program spooked the EU into a flurry of industrial policy announcements. Now, the political dust has settled, and the EU’s main green industry initiatives will finally hit the legislative books. So, what has become of the EU’s new green industry agenda, and what can we learn from it about Europe’s role in the new global age of industrial policy? Continue reading >>
0
20 December 2023
Warum wir einen Verbotsvertrag für fossile Brennstoffe brauchen
Während der COP 28 Konferenz schlossen sich Palau, Kolumbien, Samoa und Nauru offiziell der Forderung nach einem Vertrag über die Nichtverbreitung fossiler Brennstoffe an. Die Ankündigungen erfolgten in Dubai, während viele Organisationen der Zivilgesellschaft und Regierungsdelegationen sich noch für einen COP-Beschluss zum Ausstieg aus der Förderung fossiler Brennstoffe einsetzten. Diese eigenständige Vertragsinitiative, die vom Europäischen Parlament, der WHO sowie von zahlreichen Städten und wissenschaftlichen Einrichtungen unterstützt wird, wird von 12 Staaten angeführt, von denen 11 Inselstaaten sind, die am stärksten von der Klimakrise betroffen sind. Wie ich darlegen werde, ist es in der Tat eine gute Idee, einen neuen Vertrag über das Verbot der Förderung fossiler Brennstoffe auszuhandeln, auch wenn sich einige Öl, Gas und Kohle exportierende Länder weigern, daran teilzunehmen. Continue reading >>05 December 2023
The Belgian Climate Case
On November 30, the Brussels Court of Appeal rendered a landmark decision in the climate case brought by “Klimaatzaak” (“climate case” in Dutch) against Belgian public authorities (the federal and the three regional governments). In this decision, the court found the federal authority and the Brussels and Flemish regions’ climate action to be in violation of Articles 2 and 8 of the ECHR and of their duty of care, and imposed a minimal GHG reduction target to be reached by Belgian authorities for the future. In their blogpost, Alice Briegleb and Antoine De Spiegeleir provide a clear overview of the case, exploring its previous stages and insisting on the continuing failures of the Belgian climate governance and its complex federal structure. We focus on our part on how the decision makes it clear that the climate justice movement is now confronted with the tension between the legally required and the ethically desirable parameters of climate effort distribution. Continue reading >>
0
05 December 2023
From Urgenda to Klimaatzaak
On November 30, the Brussels Court of Appeal handed down its ruling in VZW Klimaatzaak v. Kingdom of Belgium & Others, commonly known as “the Belgian climate case.” The ruling is clear: Belgian authorities failed to participate adequately in the global effort to curb global warming, and they must imperatively reduce their emissions. Subscribing fully to Matthias Petel and Norman Vander Putten’s sharp analysis of how this litigation saga embodies tensions between climate justice and the separation of powers, we wish to highlight three remarkable aspects of the case. After quickly summarizing the first instance judgment and last week’s ruling, we begin by touching on the elephant in the (court)room: the articulation of the available scientific evidence with the limits of courts’ power of review and injunction. Then, we say a word about the Brussels Court of Appeal’s thorough application of European human rights law. We finish by deploring, as did the Court, Belgian federalism’s inefficiencies. Continue reading >>
0
19 November 2023
Undermining the Energy Transition
Australia is confronted with three multi-billion dollar investment treaty claims from a mining company. The basis for two of the claims is a judgment from the Queensland Land Court, in which the court recommended that no mining lease and environmental authority should be granted to a subsidiary of the claimant for its coal mine. The investment treaty arbitration serves as another illustration of how the international investment protection system poses a threat to an urgent and just energy transition. In this blog post, I explain the background of the investment treaty claim, the decision of the Queensland Land Court, and argue that the Court’s decision is an important precedent for the connection between coal, climate change, and human rights. Continue reading >>
0
28 September 2023
Act Three for Climate Litigation in Strasbourg
Yesterday, on 27 September 2023, a historic hearing took place before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights. The Court heard the Duarte Agostinho case, brought by six Portuguese children and young people against a whopping 33 Member States of the Council of Europe. Having heard two other climate cases this past March (the KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland and Carême v. France cases, respectively), this was the Court’s final hearing before it issues its first-ever findings on climate change. It was also the Court’s first youth climate case. For several reasons, yesterday’s hearing was a historic one: Duarte Agostinho is the Grand Chamber’s biggest-yet climate case, both in terms of the substantive rights invoked and the number of States involved. Continue reading >>
0