Climate litigation playing an increasing role in governance mechanisms, says UN
The growing number and diversity of climate litigation cases worldwide is strengthening climate law’s role as a governance mechanism, according to a UN report. The report says this trend is both increasingly holding governments accountable for inadequate action and weakening existing climate policies.
Climate change in the courtroom, the fourth annual Climate Litigation Report published by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), finds that climate litigation cases are becoming more frequent and numerous and details how courts are shaping climate ambition and accountability.
According to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, based at New York City’s Columbia University – which analysed the cases in the report – as of June this year, a total of 3,099 climate change cases had been filed in 55 jurisdictions. Of these, 1,936 had been filed in the US.
As the report outlines, such cases have sought to enforce existing climate laws; order legislators, policymakers, and businesses to be more ambitious and thorough in their approaches to climate change; establish clear definitions related to human rights obligations; and obtain compensation for climate harms.
The report notes that countries remain “largely off track” to meet the Paris Agreement goals and that a “quantum leap in ambition” is needed if global emissions are to be kept to within 1.5C of pre-industrial levels. Under current nationally-determined contributions, the UNEP estimates that there is a 97% probability of exceeding a 2C global temperature rise.
It says court decisions may help to hold governments and other organisations accountable for climate commitments, drive “forward-looking climate ambition… and deter backsliding”.
Read more: Countries have a legal obligation to tackle climate change, International Court of Justice rules
However, it also highlights that in some cases, litigation is used to resist or weaken existing climate policies.
The diversity of climate litigation means that “its trajectory is neither linear nor uniformly progressive. Legal actions arise from a wide range of motivations – from efforts to compel stronger mitigation measures to challenges against ambitious climate regulations”.
It gives the example of lawsuits filed by regulated entities that contest governments’ regulatory choices, and the use of courts to adjudicate trade-offs between climate change and the economy.
“Courts and other adjudicatory bodies are not merely passive venues for dispute resolution; they have increasingly become spaces where the contours of climate law and policy are contested, clarified and advanced”, the report says.
“Looking ahead, litigation will continue to be a critical tool for defining responsibilities, testing legal boundaries and shaping more effective and equitable climate action.”
The report comprises three main sections: an overview of global climate litigation through analysis of the number of cases and their geographic distribution – including cases against governments related to ‘climate rights’ and domestic enforcement of international climate change commitments; discussion of evident and emerging trends based on the results of a survey; and reflections on key lessons.
Read more: First climate ‘tipping point’ has been crossed, finds major report in stark warning ahead of COP30
Notable cases
Notable examples of climate cases include the International Court of Justice’s ruling in July that wealthy nations must comply with international commitments to limit pollution or risk having to pay compensation to countries hardest hit by climate change, and the case won by the Club of Climate Seniors – comprising more than 2,000 elderly Swiss women – in April 2023.
In the latter case, the European Court of Human Rights – whose rulings are binding for EU member states – agreed that the Swiss government’s failure to reach the country’s emissions targets constituted a direct threat to the plaintiffs’ right to life and ordered it to do more to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.
However, in June 2024, the country’s parliament voted to reject the court’s ruling after the government stated that it already had an effective climate change strategy in place and did not need to react.
About Mia Hunt
Mia has been editor of globalgovernmentforum.com since 2019. She has 15 years’ experience as a journalist and editor and specialises in writing for civil and public servants worldwide, including covering sustainability policy and related issues. She has led the Global Government Women’s Network since it launched in 2023. Previously, she covered commercial property having been market reports and supplements editor at Property Week and deputy editor at Retail Destination. She graduated from Kingston University London with a first-class honours degree in journalism and was part of the team that produced The River newspaper, which won Publication of the Year at the Guardian Student Media Awards in 2010.
