Can we use the courts to compel climate action?

Given that there are so many different legal jurisdictions, I think that it is difficult to predict the future on this one. However, I think that the German decision is very encouraging, as is the fact that numerous other cases are underway. The number of cases implies that the lawyers involved think that positive verdicts are possible. Furthermore, as more cases are hopefully won, it will probably embolden others to do the same.

This is HUGE! A Dutch court has found that Shell must curb its carbon emissions by 45% by 2030, compared with 2019 levels. The ruling could set a legal precedent opening other oil companies to new legal jeopardy over their carbon emissions.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/shell-ordered-by-dutch-court-to-cut-carbon-emissions-11622038961

Quoted from Adam Thyer on Thursday, 27 May 2021

This is HUGE! A Dutch court has found that Shell must curb its carbon emissions by 45% by 2030, compared with 2019 levels. The ruling could set a legal precedent opening other oil companies to new legal jeopardy over their carbon emissions.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/shell-ordered-by-dutch-court-to-cut-carbon-emissions-11622038961

This "explainer" about the Dutch court's decision is useful:

https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/what-dutch-court-carbon-emissions-ruling-means-shell-2021-05-26/

This part is critically important:

The ruling applies to Shell and its suppliers and covers not only the companies' emissions but also emissions from products burned by its customers.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2021/05/26/1000475878/in-landmark-case-dutch-court-orders-shell-to-cut-its-carbon-emissions-faster

Assuming Shell's appeal is unsuccessful, this decision could pave the way to using courts to compel big polluters to phase out the extraction and use of fossil fuels.

The federal court of Australia has found the environment minister, Sussan Ley, has a duty of care to protect young people from the climate crisis in a judgment hailed by lawyers and teenagers who brought the case as a world first.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/27/australian-court-finds-government-has-duty-to-protect-young-people-from-climate-crisis

Here are some more stories about the Shell case:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/05/27/royal-dutch-shell-netherlands-hague-court-oil-fossil-fuels-climate-change/

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/26/business/royal-dutch-shell-climate-change.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidrvetter/2021/05/26/shell-oil-verdict-could-trigger-a-wave-of-climate-litigation-against-big-polluters/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/01/shell-historic-loss-hague-fight-big-oil

Five Polish citizens are suing their government for failing to protect them from global heating impacts:

https://www.intelligentliving.co/citizens-sue-polish-government-climate-change/

I hope these legal victories continue!

This story is encouraging:

Businesses could soon be facing a fresh wave of legal action holding them to account for their greenhouse gas emissions, owing to advances in climate science, experts have warned.

Rupert Stuart-Smith, researcher at the Oxford University sustainable law programme, and lead author of a new study, said more such cases were likely to be successful, as new science was making it possible to attribute the damages of climate breakdown more directly to companies’ activities.

“It’s no longer far-fetched to think that these companies can be taken to court successfully,” he said. “The strength of evidence is bolstering these claims, and giving a firm evidentiary basis for these court cases.”

The researchers examined 73 lawsuits around the world, and found that many failed to use the latest science in their evidence. They concluded that the chances of success of such litigants could have been improved if they had used the latest science, which is increasingly able to show clear links between companies’ activities giving rise to carbon emissions, and the damages caused by extreme weather.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/28/new-climate-science-could-cause-wave-of-litigation-against-businesses-study

Australia's government said on Friday it would challenge a court ruling that found the environment minister has an obligation to the next generation to consider the harm caused by climate change when approving the expansion of a new coal mine.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australia-govt-appeal-court-ruling-climate-change-duty-care-2021-07-09/

Today, I read this article about how climate change attribution science could be used to 'fill the evidence “gap” in climate litigation'. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

A story from today's Irish Times:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40348232.html

Taking national governments to court over climate policies, such as happened when an environmental body won a case at the Irish Supreme Court last year, can help spur real and meaningful change.

That is according to a new paper from the Dublin-based international affairs think tank, the Institute of International and European Affairs (IIEA), which looked at the increasing litigation taken across Europe by citizens and groups over perceived shortfalls in action taken on the climate crisis.

The IIEA said that the historic signing of Ireland's Climate Bill, which commits Ireland to a 51% reduction in emissions by 2030, was hugely influenced by action taken by the Friends of the Irish Environment (FIE) group.

Climate change litigation is on the rise in Europe.

A story from the Washington Post about the status of climate-related law cases in the US:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/08/19/biden-climate-drilling/

For preventing misunderstandings I start by describing myself as a convinced environmentalist. Already I 1982 I was politically responsible for building a large housing project where the house nearly obtained zero energy use for space heating. With small improvements and from the shelf technology such houses now could be built even better.
I only started an addition of 6000 houses to our town when public transportation with a tramway was present nearly from the beginning on.
In my whole career I have given and still give lectures "all over the world" about how easy we can come nearer to sustainable living.
But I have serious doubt about the effects of the above mentioned court rulings.
Laws and court rulings are effective only if these live in the souls and brains of the people involved.
Therefore I think positive communication and convincing people are much more effective instruments.
The legal "victories" in no way will get to the desired effects. The result might even be more resistance.