12 November 2025
One Step Back and Two Steps Forward
In May, after years of litigation, the Higher Regional Court of Hamm rendered its final decision in Lliuya v. RWE AG – a landmark case in which a Peruvian farmer sought to hold the German energy giant RWE financially responsible for measures protecting his property from a potential glacier flood. Although the Court rejected the claim in the end, the judgment has been celebrated as a “success without victory” due to the potential precedent effect in terms of corporate liability. The true significance of the Lliuya v. RWE decision lies not in its dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim, but in the court’s reasoning on extraterritoriality, causality, and preventive protection. Continue reading >>
0 
24 October 2025
Rethinking Highest Possible Ambition
States classify a large portion of agricultural emissions as “hard to abate”, framing them as residual emissions which must be compensated through removals. As other sectors decarbonise more rapidly, persistent agricultural emissions pose a significant obstacle to achieving the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target, underscoring the growing importance of reducing emissions in this sector to restoring a pathway consistent with returning to 1.5°C as quickly as possible. Continue reading >>
0
24 July 2025
The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion on Climate Change
“An existential threat” – this is how the International Court of Justice (ICJ) characterized climate change in its long-awaited advisory opinion on the obligations of States with respect to climate change. In the most significant development in international climate law since the adoption of the Paris Agreement, the ICJ outlined numerous obligations that could significantly shape the contours of international environmental law and global climate governance. Continue reading >>
0