The global legal battle against climate change is intensifying, even as governments appear to be stalling on climate efforts. Over the last decade, activists have successfully challenged several national governments, leading to more climate-friendly policies in countries such as the Netherlands, Pakistan, Switzerland, and South Korea. This trend is expected to continue, with many cases currently underway.
Climate litigation is gaining momentum, according to Dennis van Berkel from the Climate Litigation Network, who noted that there is increasing trend of lawsuits regarding climate issues. Recently, Australia's highest court blocked the expansion of a coal mine in New South Wales due to its environmental impact. This ruling demonstrates the growing influence of climate litigation on domestic and international policies.
Despite governments in regions such as Europe and the US scaling back their climate initiatives, international courts have affirmed that nations have a legal duty to combat climate change. Three international courts, including the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), have made such rulings. A fourth opinion is anticipated from the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights.
While advisory opinions from these courts are not legally binding, their principles are already influencing national courts. For instance, a Paris court referenced the ICJ opinion in a ruling mandating TotalEnergies to factor in emissions from its products in its corporate vigilance plan. In January, a Dutch court cited the ICJ interpretation when it ordered the Netherlands to revise its climate strategy.
The legal precedent regarding companies is less developed, but lawyers point to a tightening net for oil firms. Prolonged legal battles have led to the revocation of permits for various fossil fuel projects, and Norway's Supreme Court is expected to make a ruling on North Sea project licenses soon. Additionally, the Dutch Supreme Court will rule in 2027 on whether to impose specific emissions reduction targets on Shell.
Another potential breakthrough could arise if courts require major polluters to compensate individuals affected by climate change based on their greenhouse gas emissions. This principle moved forward in a German court last year, which allowed a claim by a Peruvian farmer against energy company RWE to proceed, despite ultimately rejecting compensation. Numerous similar lawsuits are underway globally.
Despite the growing trend of climate litigation, there have been setbacks. Climate groups have lost cases against oil companies in the US, and New Zealand's government changed laws to block a lawsuit by Māori activist Mike Smith against several domestic companies, although he plans to continue his fight. Nevertheless, Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, a law professor at the University of Amsterdam, stated that a lot has been achieved in a short period of time.
Key points
- Climate change litigation is growing domestically and internationally.
- International courts have affirmed that nations have a legal duty to combat climate change.
- The principles of international court rulings are influencing national courts.
