Courts Set to Play Crucial Role in Climate Crisis as Lawmakers Fall Short

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) have issued landmark advisory opinions, affirming that countries must address climate change, and that failure to do so may carry serious legal consequences. This renewed legal clarity comes at a critical moment, as global average temperatures exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels last year, the hottest on record. The gulf between the urgency of the climate threat and the policy response continues to widen, and the legal system has become a key driver of climate progress. As the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Brazil (COP30) approaches, the groundwork has been laid for stronger, fairer, and more accountable climate action.

Key Takeaways:

• The ICJ and IACtHR opinions affirm that countries must address climate change, and failure to do so may carry serious legal consequences.
• National climate plans (NDCs) must reflect the "highest possible ambition" and be consistent with the 2015 Paris climate agreement's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
• As of 2024, global temperatures are on track to rise by up to 3.1°C by the end of the century, with only half of greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions covered by updated climate pledges.
• The ICJ and IACtHR decisions provide new tools for negotiators and civil-society representatives to push for ambitious measures at COP30.
• A rapid phaseout of coal, oil, and gas is essential to effective climate action, but many countries continue to obstruct progress.
• The ICJ has explicitly recognised that governments may be held liable for failure to reduce GHG emissions, including through fossil-fuel production, consumption, exploration, and subsidies.
• The international climate regime must evolve to reflect changing legal realities, including stronger compliance mechanisms and more effective climate-finance commitments.
• Developed countries have a legally binding duty to support mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage efforts across the developing world, requiring at least $1.3 trillion to be mobilised annually by 2035.
• The private sector is not being let off the hook, with the ICJ, IACtHR, and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea recognising that governments must regulate corporations where necessary to protect the environment.
• Courts such as Germany's Higher Regional Court of Hamm have ruled that large emitters can, in principle, be held liable for climate-related impacts.
• Governments must establish clear legal frameworks to hold major emitters fully accountable for their role in driving the climate crisis.

Statistics:

• As of 2024, global temperatures are on track to rise by up to 3.1°C by the end of the century.
• Only half of greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions are covered by updated climate pledges.
• At least $1.3 trillion must be mobilised annually by 2035 to meet the legally binding duty to support mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage efforts across the developing world.
• The Adaptation Fund and the Loss and Damage Fund require effective and equitable climate finance, with a proposed global levy on fossil-fuel profits and high-emitting sectors.

Sources:

• ICJ
• IACtHR
• International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
• United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30)
• German Higher Regional Court of Hamm
• National climate plans (NDCs)
• Paris climate agreement
• Vanuatu
• Peruvian farmer Saul Luciano Lliuya