19 April 2024
The European Court of Human Rights’ Kick Into Touch
On April 9, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled on three applications concerning the fight against climate change and the positive obligations of the signatory states of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in this respect. This blog post analyzes the Carême decision in which the Court declared inadmissible an application brought by a former mayor of a French town on the grounds of incompatibility ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (§ 88). In my view, this is an ill-developed decision, which could dangerously imply a regression in environmental matters. Continue reading >>
0 
18 April 2024
Menschenrecht auf Klimaschutz als „lebensrettende Behandlung“?
Manuela Niehaus verteidigt die menschenrechtsgestützte Klimarechtsprechung – insbesondere des EGMR – gegen meine Kritik. Es handele sich nicht um „Globuli für Umweltjuristen“, sondern um ein potentiell lebensrettendes Medikament, das – im Zusammenspiel mit anderen Mitteln – einen wesentlichen Beitrag zum Klimaschutz leisten könne. Das sehen sicher viele ähnlich und darum bin ich dankbar für Niehaus Argumente und für ihren sanften Spott. Ihr Spott trifft mich zu Recht, ihre Argumente aber überzeugen mich nur sehr teilweise. Continue reading >>
0
18 April 2024
KlimaSeniorinnen and the Choice Between Imperfect Options
The facts of Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland were categorically different from the ECtHR’s previous environmental case law. The Court therefore decided to incorporate important parts of International Climate Change Law into the ECHR. From an institutional perspective, this approach, which is not without its weaknesses, amounts to the ECtHR’s attempt to maintain the relevance of the Convention in the midst of the climate crisis, while, at the same, carefully striving to respect the realm of politics. Continue reading >>
0
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