scholarly journals State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda Foundation

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
pp. 729-735
Author(s):  
Maiko Meguro
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Emissions Reduction ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
The Supreme Court

The judgment in State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda Foundation marks one of the first successful challenges to climate change policy based on a human rights treaty. In this case, the Dutch Supreme Court upheld the lower court's opinion that the Netherlands has a positive obligation under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to take reasonable and suitable measures for the prevention of climate change. Although the Supreme Court recognized that climate change is a consequence of collective human activities that cannot be solved by one state on its own, it held that the Netherlands is individually responsible for failing to do its part to counter the danger of climate change, which, as the Court affirmed, inhibits enjoyment of ECHR rights. In reaching that conclusion, the Supreme Court determined the exact level of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction that the Netherlands is required to meet to comply with its ECHR obligation, specifically, a 25 percent reduction compared to its 1990 level by the end of 2020.

The State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda (Neth. Sup. Ct.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 811-848
Author(s):  
André Nollkaemper ◽  
Laura Burgers
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Supreme Court

On December 20, 2019, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands published its judgment in The State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda. The judgment is largely a discussion of questions of Dutch law, but contains several conclusions that are relevant from an international law perspective. In particular, the Court held that on the basis of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Netherlands has a positive obligation to take measures for the prevention of climate change and that it was required to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 25 percent by the end of 2020, compared with 1990 levels.

scholarly journals Swiss Climate Change Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 17-47
Author(s):  
Julia Hänni ◽  
Tienmu Ma
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Climate ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
European Court ◽  
Recent Innovation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Reduce Emissions

AbstractThis chapter explores the relationship between Swiss climate change law and the international and European climate change regimes. At the international level, the chapter reviews the three major international agreements regulating the field: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC, and the Paris Agreement. And at the national and regional levels, the chapter briefly describes the CO2 Act—often considered the heart of Swiss climate change policy—and questions whether it will prove effective in achieving its explicitly stated emissions reduction targets. The chapter then reviews the most significant recent innovation in the evolution of Swiss climate change policy: joining the Emissions Trading System (ETS) established by the European Union. Due to long-standing problems afflicting the ETS, the authors raise doubts about whether Switzerland’s joining the scheme will lead to meaningful reductions in the country’s greenhouse gas emissions. As an alternative to an ETS-centric approach, the authors refer to an approach centered on human rights. Drawing on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the major international climate change agreements, other sources of international law, and the recent Urgenda decision of the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, the authors argue that under the human rights approach, Switzerland would be obligated to take stronger measures to reduce emissions than it could hope to achieve through the ETS and the CO2 Act alone.

scholarly journals The State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda Foundation: Ruling of the Court of Appeal of The Hague (9 October 2018)

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benoit Mayer
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
District Court ◽  
Emissions Reduction ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Dangerous Climate Change ◽  
Court Of Appeal

AbstractOn 9 October 2018, the Court of Appeal of The Hague (the Netherlands) upheld the District Court’s decision in the case of Urgenda, thus confirming the obligation of the Netherlands to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 25% by 2020 compared with levels in 1990. This case raised some of the thorniest issues in climate law. As the Netherlands is responsible for only a tiny fraction of global GHG emissions, is it right for a court to hold that a national emissions reduction mitigation target is necessary to prevent dangerous climate change and its impact on human rights? If so, how can this target be determined? The District Court and the Court of Appeal of The Hague have provided inspiring responses, although they are perhaps not entirely convincing.

scholarly journals (Just) Give Me A Reason …

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 12-35
Author(s):  
Julia Laffranque
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Summary Judgment

Judicial systems often wrestle with whether to sacrifice always presenting thorough judicial reasoning for the sake of an effective leave-to-appeal system. The paper outlines issues of reference to the Luxembourg Court, particularly with regard to Estonian circumstances in light of the ECtHR judgment in Baydar v. the Netherlands. The interplay between EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights in this regard is considered first, along with the importance of giving reasons, courts’ authority, the different roles of domestic and European courts, the duty of referring questions to the CJEU and exemption, consequences of non-referral in EU law, the Strasbourg Court’s role in dialogue between national courts and the CJEU, etc. Examined next are such matters as influences on preliminary references in European Union law, summary reasoning and limits to the reasoning duty (especially with regard to the Ullens de Schooten case of the ECtHR), associated division of competencies between the Strasbourg and Luxembourg courts, and finally the reasoning of the ECtHR itself as good or bad example. The author then considers the Supreme Court of Estonia’s leave-to-appeal system and the national courts’ practice in relation to Baydar, concluding that, while reasoned judgments are important and a right, no right exists for the applicant’s case to be referred by a domestic judge to the Luxembourg Court, though it is vital that summary judgment not be arbitrary / manifestly unreasonable; that Estonian courts have made reasonable use of the preliminary reference procedure before the Luxembourg Court thus far; and that they should articulate well the reasoning for referral/non-referral for litigants. The author proposes that the Estonian Supreme Court explain, exceptionally in one refusal of leave to appeal (cf. the Netherlands), that the general requirements for granting leave to appeal cover also the situation of preliminary questions to the CJEU and C.I.L.F.I.T. arguments of the CJEU. Above all, neither the interplay between EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights nor the role of national courts finding their way in complex legal surroundings should be neglected. 

scholarly journals The future of climate policymaking in light of Urgenda Foundation v the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124
Author(s):  
Irene Antonopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Climate Action ◽  
State Obligations ◽  
Tackle Climate Change ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Dutch Supreme

The decision of the Dutch Supreme Court in The State of the Netherlands v Urgenda Foundation represents a breakthrough and a step forward in addressing the human rights aspects of climate change. The significance of the case has been recognised by commentators and the UN Human Rights Commissioner, who asked for a repeat of Urgenda’s journey in other jurisdictions. Despite the implication that other states have similar obligations to those construed by the Dutch Supreme Court, the influence of the case in other jurisdictions is yet to be seen. This article recognises the significance of the Urgenda case to the definition of state obligations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as part of their commitments under the European Convention on Human Rights. In particular, the article discusses the progress made in interpreting Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in clarifying state obligations to take decisive measures to tackle climate change in line with their climate action commitments.

14. Land Law and Human Rights

Land Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 593-629
Author(s):  
Chris Bevan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Land Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the relationship between land law and human rights. From a distinctly land law perspective, the human rights discourse has given rise to much debate, which continues to fuel much academic commentary including recent examination of the availability of horizontal effect in McDonald v McDonald in the Supreme Court and in the European Court of Human Rights. The chapter focuses chiefly on the two most pertinent provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for land law; namely Art. 1 of the First Protocol and Art. 8 and reflects on the, at times, difficult relationship between land law and human rights.

Climate Change Litigation: Global Trends and Critical Issues in the Light of the Urgenda 2018 Decision and the IPCC Special Report “global Warming of 1.5 °C”

Global Jurist ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Jacometti
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Special Report ◽  
Global Trends ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Key Features

Abstract This essay highlights the major global trends and critical issues that emerged so far in climate change litigation, through the analysis of some significant cases in different jurisdictions. Climate cases involve different actors and a wide variety of claims: claims challenging specific projects or activities; lawsuits dealing with damages caused by climate change-related events and seeking compensation and/or injunctions; cases aiming at amending key features of national climate change policy and legislation. Finally, the essay identifies some trends in the very heterogeneous body of arguments that are brought before the courts, including obligations arising from international and human rights law.

scholarly journals ABORTION IN NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS: REFLECTIONS FROM THE UK SUPREME COURT

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-494
Author(s):  
Bríd Ní Ghráinne ◽  
Aisling McMahon
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

AbstractOn 7 June 2018, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSCt) issued its decision on, inter alia, whether Northern Ireland's near-total abortion ban was compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). This article critically assesses the UKSC's treatment of international law in this case. It argues that the UKSCt was justified in finding that Northern Ireland's ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, and FFA was a violation of Article 8, but that the majority erred in its assessment of Article 3 ECHR and of the relevance of international law more generally.

Informing Climate Change Policy Through Economics and Engineering Perspectives on Energy Efficiency

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priya Sreedharan ◽  
Alan H. Sanstad ◽  
Joe Bryson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
State And Local ◽  
End Use

Energy “sustainability” and energy supply have again emerged as central public policy issues and are at the intersection of the economic, environmental, and security challenges facing the nation and the world. The goal of significantly reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with energy production and consumption, while maintaining affordable and reliable energy supplies, is one of the most important issues. Among the strategies for achieving this goal, increasing the efficiency of energy consumption in buildings is being emphasized to a degree not seen since the 1970s. “End-use” efficiency is the core of the State of California’s landmark effort to reduce its GHG emissions, of other state and local climate-change initiatives, and is emphasized in emerging federal GHG abatement legislation. Both economic and engineering methods are used to analyze energy efficiency, but the two paradigms provide different perspectives on the market and technological factors that affect the diffusion of energy efficiency. These disparate perspectives influence what is considered the appropriate role and design of public policy for leveraging not just efficient end-use technology, but other sustainable energy technologies. We review the two approaches and their current roles in the GHG policy process by describing, for illustrative purposes, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s assessment of energy efficiency in the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 Discussion Draft. We highlight opportunities and needs for improved coordination between the engineering, economic and policy communities. Our view is that a better understanding of disciplinary differences and complementarities in perspectives and analytical methods between these communities will benefit the climate change policy process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document