Climate Change Liability After All: A Dutch Landmark Case
In spring of 2015, the District Court of The Hague issued an injunction in a class-action suit against the Dutch State to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) before 2020 by 25 percent compared to 1990. The case was initiated by the foundation, Urgenda, and 886 individual plaintiffs against the State of the Netherlands. This is the first time a government has been held liable for a climate policy that is substandard according to international norms. Since the ruling is well reasoned—addressing the issues of the standing of Urgenda, the State’s duty of care towards its citizens, the pr... Mehr ...
Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Dokumenttyp: | Artikel |
Erscheinungsdatum: | 2016 |
Reihe/Periodikum: | Tilburg Law Review, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 5-30 (2016) |
Verlag/Hrsg.: |
Ubiquity Press
|
Schlagwörter: | climate change liability / Urgenda c.s. v the State of the Netherlands / UN Climate Treaty / Articles 2 and 8 European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) / duty of care / causation / separation of powers / injunction to reduce / Law of Europe / KJ-KKZ / Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence / K1-7720 |
Sprache: | Englisch |
Permalink: | https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-27583960 |
Datenquelle: | BASE; Originalkatalog |
Powered By: | BASE |
Link(s) : | https://doi.org/10.1163/22112596-02101001 |
In spring of 2015, the District Court of The Hague issued an injunction in a class-action suit against the Dutch State to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) before 2020 by 25 percent compared to 1990. The case was initiated by the foundation, Urgenda, and 886 individual plaintiffs against the State of the Netherlands. This is the first time a government has been held liable for a climate policy that is substandard according to international norms. Since the ruling is well reasoned—addressing the issues of the standing of Urgenda, the State’s duty of care towards its citizens, the problem of the ‘many hands’, and many other fundamental questions—it deserves close attention. It will most probably become a landmark case with international precedential value.