16 April 2024
Homeopathic Globules for Environmental Lawyers
Are courts, as institutions aimed at individual justice, suitable institutions for dealing with the climate crisis? Could they guide the social and global transformation processes that are certainly necessary? Bernhard Wegener takes a clear stand against the “sweet illusion of climate justice“. Continue reading >>
0 
15 April 2024
On the Duarte Agostinho Decision
We may not readily describe Duarte Agostinho as a success. But it does offer an excellent opportunity to clarify what we mean by ‘success’ in this context. Arguably, this depends on our expectations – whether that’s to generate attention, trigger mobilization, seek judicial engagement with an issue, clarify the law, or pursue a given outcome, among others. Continue reading >>
0
12 April 2024
States’ Extraterritorial Jurisdiction for Climate-Related Impacts
States’ extraterritorial jurisdiction was one of the hot topics decided by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Duarte Agostinho. Strictly speaking, the “lack of it” led the ECtHR to declare the complaint inadmissible with respect to all defendant States except Portugal. This finding is in line with previous ECtHR case law but highlights a gap in human rights protection and creates a mismatch between the ECtHR’s case law and that of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). Continue reading >>
0
12 April 2024
Climate Litigation Reaches Italian Courts
With Giudizio Universale, climate litigation has found its way to Italy. This case has many aspects in common with the general transnational phenomenon, both in terms of the structure and content of the legal arguments used. The case highlights the difficulties that courts face in view of the high social expectations connected to this kind of proceedings. Continue reading >>
0
11 April 2024
The Meaning of Carbon Budget within a Wide Margin of Appreciation
Although the KlimaSeniorinnen judgment discusses a number of rights of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including Article 6 (right of access to a court), Article 2 (right to life), and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), the focus of this blog post is on its discussion of Article 8 (right to private, home and family life). The question raised by that discussion is whether the judgment is one that will “frighten the horses” and lead to oppositional cries of judicial overreach around the separation of powers, or if it is more an unexceptional case of “move on, nothing to see here.” My argument is that the judgment is mostly the latter but that it has what, in computer gaming terms, is known as an “Easter egg” – a hidden element included by the developers to surprise and reward those who look carefully. That could turn out to be more controversial. Continue reading >>
0
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 >>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
01 February 2024