05 November 2026
Death by a Thousand Cuts
On 30 September 2026, the Swiss Federal Council informed the Committee of Ministers (CoM) of the Council of Europe that it would not set up an independent climate council. A year earlier, the CoM had invited Switzerland to consider such a body, as part of its supervision of KlimaSeniorinnen – the first binding international judgment to find a state in breach of its climate obligations. Switzerland’s recent refusal is not an isolated phenomenon but part of a pattern of resistance that has accompanied the judgment since its delivery in April 2024. Continue reading >>
0 
05 November 2026
Der schleichende Tod eines Urteils
Am 30. September 2026 teilte der Schweizer Bundesrat dem Ministerkomitee des Europarats mit, dass er keinen unabhängigen Klimarat einrichten werde. Ein Jahr zuvor hatte das Ministerkomitee die Schweiz eingeladen, ein solches Gremium zu prüfen. Dies geschah im Rahmen der Überwachung, ob das Urteil KlimaSeniorinnen – das erste verbindliche Urteil eines internationalen Gerichts, das einen Verstoss eines Staates gegen seine klimabezogenen Verpflichtungen feststellte – umgesetzt wird. Die jüngste Absage der Schweiz ist kein Einzelfall. Sie fügt sich in ein Muster des Widerstands ein, das das Urteil seit seiner Verkündung im April 2024 begleitet. Continue reading >>13 July 2026
Heatwaves and Legal Remedies
Europe suffered an unprecedented heatwave this June, with debilitating effects felt across various walks of life: thousands of deaths, particularly among the elderly, individuals and families suffering in “heat-trap” apartments, hospitals full and caught unprepared, school closures, and productivity losses. Adaptation measures are indispensable for coping with these soaring temperatures, which have cost lives and severely affected people’s well-being. However, rights-based litigation involving adaptation in Europe has until recently been notable by its absence. Continue reading >>
0
24 June 2026
Procedural Rights in Climate Cases Before the ECtHR
This blog post takes the landmark ruling KlimaSeniorinnen as a starting point to examine the role of procedural rights in climate litigation before the European Court of Human Rights. Procedural rights, as we argue, can be understood in a twofold manner: on the one hand, as admissibility criteria structuring access to the Court, and on the other, as substantive guarantees flowing from the Convention itself. Read in this light, KlimaSeniorinnen – alongside Greenpeace Nordic – reveals key developments in the Court’s emerging climate jurisprudence across both dimensions. Continue reading >>
0
17 June 2026
KlimaSeniorinnen and its Progeny
On 9 April 2024, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered rulings in three climate-change cases, thus becoming the first international court to establish a right to be protected from the effects of climate change. The leading judgment was Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland. Now, two years after the KlimaSeniorinnen precedent, we can perhaps begin to take stock of its implications and its progeny. Continue reading >>
0
28 April 2026
An Off-Ramp for the Plaumann Paradox
On 16 April 2026, AG Ćapeta delivered an Opinion in the Medel case (C-555/24) on the standing of NGOs to bring actions for annulment under conditions that they are directly and individually concerned. Instead of copying the ECtHR’s approach in KlimaSeniorinnen, she gives an elegant and simple spin to the Plaumann formula. At its core, AG Ćapeta recognises that associations protecting collective interests have a separate identity of their own with a distinct interest. The Opinion gives the Court an argumentative avenue to finally amend its self-inflicted access to justice paradox. Continue reading >>17 February 2026
High Thresholds and Wide Margins
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued an inadmissibility declaration in the climate case of Fliegenschnee and Others v. Austria. While an unsuccessful outcome was expected, the decision nevertheless clarifies three aspects of the Court’s climate jurisprudence. Taken together, the case shows that the Court neither demanded more than in previous cases nor reneged on its requirements as laid down in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland. Continue reading >>
0
09 February 2026
The Bonaire Climate Case
Once again, all eyes were on The Hague. After groundbreaking rulings in the Urgenda and Shell cases, the District Court in The Hague on 28 January delivered another important climate change decision in the case of Greenpeace Netherlands v. The Netherlands (Bonaire). The court, acknowledging the contested political context in which the ruling was made, sought to square the circle of state mitigation obligations by balancing potentially far-reaching considerations about the mitigation efforts required from states like the Netherlands with an innovative procedural and dialogue-oriented remedy. Continue reading >>
0
22 December 2025
Europe’s Climate Crisis Is a Rule-of-Law Crisis
After watering down the 2040 emission reduction target, running the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive over by the Omnibus, and now attempting to kill the combustion engine ban, European climate governance has entered the territory of lawlessness. European climate governance is no longer only about the climate. It has become a rule of law issue and should be treated as such. Continue reading >>
0
09 September 2025
A Step Forward in Italian Climate Litigation
Climate litigation achieved an important milestone in Italy. In a landmark order on 18 July 2025, the Supreme Court of Cassation confirmed that Italian courts may assert jurisdiction over climate-related damages for the first time. The ruling opens the door to holding both public and private actors liable for climate inaction. Continue reading >>
0