01 July 2024
Ukraine, the Netherlands and 26 Third States Without Russia Before the ECtHR
The hearing in the case of Ukraine, the Netherlands v Russia lasted four hours and twenty-five minutes. more than double than an “ordinary” Grand Chamber hearing. These four hours and twenty-five minutes are an important milestone in what is undoubtedly one of the most important set of cases in the history of European Convention on Human Rights. They cover more than ten years of Russian activities in Eastern Ukraine, including the open war of aggression since February 2022. The number of third parties involved in the proceedings likewise renders the case extraordinary. Continue reading >>
0 
19 June 2024
Up to Four Times
The Council of Europe’s requirements for transparency in the process of selecting a national judge for the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) should be strengthened. This is the lesson to be learned from the saga of the selection of a Polish judge, lasting now for more than three years. Poland, which has been going through a crisis of the rule of law in recent years, and the ongoing process of its restoration, may serve as an important example. Continue reading >>
0
24 May 2024
After Switzerland Comes Austria
The KlimaSeniorinnen judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has been the subject of intense debate for several weeks. One focus was on the question of standing, i.e., who can bring a lawsuit connected to climate change and human rights before the ECtHR. However, less attention has been paid to the question of the impact of the judgment on currently pending climate change cases before the ECtHR. This blog post sheds light on “climate change case number four”, a case against Austria primarily challenging the shortcomings of the Austrian Climate Protection Act.
Continue reading >>15 May 2024
The New Transgender Ruling in Czechia
In a recent decision in the case of N.G. (Pl. ÚS 52/23), the Czech Constitutional Court (CCC) addressed the pressing issue of trans persons’ rights, more specifically the requirements for legal gender reassignment, involving (often involuntary) sterilisation and castration. When compared to the earlier decision in T.H. (Pl. ÚS 2/20), the new ruling represents a major shift. In fact, the CCC changed its legal position by 180 degrees, giving preference to protecting individual rights over deferring to the legislator’s choices. Continue reading >>
0
10 May 2024
Reparation for Climate Change at the ECtHR
The recent rulings on climate change by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are—as others have pointed out in this blog symposium—both “historic and unprecedented” for various reasons, not least regarding the question of reparation for climate change-related harm. While redress is a pivotal question to think through in relation to climate change, it has, somewhat surprisingly, received less attention from scholars and has not yet been directly addressed by international courts and tribunals. In this regard, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland might be considered a missed opportunity on the part of the ECtHR. Continue reading >>
0
07 May 2024
KlimaSeniorinnen and the Question(s) of Causation
In Verein Klimaseniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland, the European Court of Human Rights makes many general statements about the nature of climate change and different actors’ roles in addressing it. Many points have been addressed in this blog symposium. In my blog post, I turn to a more technical aspect of the judgment, namely the question of causation. I will untangle the analytical gymnastics that the Court performs regarding this question. I will argue that the reasoning regarding causation is confusing and that it is not clear how specifically the ‘real prospect’ test is applied for finding a breach. Continue reading >>
0
29 April 2024
The European Court of Human Rights’ April 9 Climate Rulings and the Future (Thereof)
By recognizing the responsibility they have toward future individuals who will be standing in their shoes, current decision-makers are encouraged to adopt long-term perspectives and consider the broader implications of their actions beyond the immediate. This responsibility is echoed in numerous statements by the ECtHR in its rulings about how it understands its own role in European society and the world, and about the deference it believes it owes to domestic decision-makers on the one hand, and to its own past and future work on the other hand. In this light, the ECtHR has struck a pragmatic yet slightly cynical balance between the great demands it was faced with and the great responsibilities it owes to European citizens, to other institutions, and to itself. Continue reading >>25 April 2024
The Paris Effect
The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case Verein KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland is a striking example of the Paris effect: the influence of the non-binding collective goals of the Paris Agreement (PA) on the interpretation of domestic constitutional law or international human rights law in climate litigation. The Court’s decision proves to be an essential element in triggering the necessary democratic debates on which the PA relies “from the bottom up”. Reinforcing the procedural limb of Art. 8 ECHR will be an essential step towards further strengthening democratic decision-making in the societal transition to climate neutrality. Continue reading >>
0
22 April 2024
The First Italian Climate Judgement and the Separation of Powers
On 26th February 2024, in its Giudizio Universale decision, the Tribunal of Rome penned the first Italian climate judgement. Shortly after, on 9 April 2024, the ECtHR handed down its seminal trio of KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland, Duarte Agostinho v. Portugal and Others and Carême v. France. In this monumental string of cases, the ECtHR set the new standard for climate litigation in Europe, also regarding separation of powers. This invites a critical assessment of Giudizio Universale’s stance. Continue reading >>19 April 2024
Gemischte Signale für das nationale Klimarecht
Die Klima-Entscheidungen der Großen Kammer des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte (EGMR) sind wegweisend. Auf den ersten Blick ist jedoch nicht vollkommen klar, wie sie sich auf das nationale Klimarecht der Vertragsstaaten der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention (EMRK) auswirken werden. Haben die strategischen Klimaklagen den von ihnen erwünschten Durchbruch erzielt, der das nationale Klimarecht revolutionieren wird? Continue reading >>
0