Specifics of resolving disputes in the field of climate protection by state courts and arbitration

Cover Page

Cite item

Abstract

The article is devoted to the study of climate claims, including new types of such claims, recorded in a number of countries in 2020-2021. They involve claims for the protection of human rights and claims against private companies. In addition, the author analyzes the most common grounds for argumentation of the plaintiffs’ positions in climate claims based on international, constitutional, administrative, and tort law. The most common legal doctrines that were used by courts as the ground for decisions on climate claims have been studied. The purpose of the study is to form an idea of a new type of claims (claims in the field of climate protection or climate claims) based on the analysis of regulations, judicial practice of foreign countries and scientific sources. The methodology includes empirical methods of comparison, description, and interpretation, theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic, special methods such as legal-dogmatic and legal norms interpretation. The study showed that judicial and arbitration proceedings on climate issues have become an effective tool used by citizens and non-governmental organizations to ensure compliance with or strengthening of the climate commitments made by governments in accordance with the 2015 Paris Agreement.

About the authors

Elena P. Ermakova

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Author for correspondence.
Email: ermakova_ep@rudn.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5722-3641

Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor of of the Department of Civil Law and Civil Procedure and Private International Law, Law Institute

6 Miklukho-Maklaya str., Moscow, 117198, Russia Federation

References

  1. Bäumler, J. (2021) Sustainable Development made justiciable: The German Constitutional Court’s climate ruling on intra- and inter-generational equity. EJIL:Talk! Blog of the European Journal of International Law. Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/sustainable-development-made-justiciable-the-german-constitutional-courts-climate-ruling-on-intra-and-inter-generational-equity/ [Accessed 21th November 2021].
  2. Bonnitcha, J. & McCorquodale, R. (2017) The Concept of ‘Due Diligence’ in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. European Journal of International Law. 28(3), 899-919. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chx042
  3. Connellan, C. et al (2021) Okpabi v Royal Dutch Shell Plc: UK Supreme Court allows Nigerian citizens’ environmental damage claim to proceed against UK parent company. White & Case LLP. Available at: https://www.whitecase.com/publications/alert/okpabi-v-royal-dutch-shell-plc-uk-supreme-court-allows-nigerian-citizens [Accessed 21th November 2021].
  4. De Wit, E., McCoach, A. (2021). Climate change litigation update. Norton Rose Fulbright. Available at: https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/56ccc2b1/climate-change-litigation-update [Accessed 21th November 2021].
  5. Ermakova, E.P. (2021) Arbitrazh kak sredstvo razresheniya sporov ob izmenenii klimata. Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS. 16(5), 55-78. https://doi.org/10.35427/2073-4522-2021-16-5 (in Russian).
  6. Ermakova, E.P. (2020) Lawsuits against governments and private companies of european countries over climate protection under the Paris Agreement 2015 (UK, Netherlands, Germany and France). Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 3(49), 604-625. https://doi.org/10.17072/1995-4190-2020-49- 604-625 (in Russian).
  7. Ermakova, E.P. & Frolova, E.E. (2021) Combating climate change by finance - the experience of the Netherlands. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. (198), 1794-1806. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69415-9_198
  8. Gershinkova, D.A. (2021) Climate Litigation: Foreign Experience and Prospects in Russia. Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. (3), 116-131. https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.033 (in Russian).
  9. Krzykowski, M. et al. (2021) Principle of reasonable and legitimate expectations in international law as a premise for investments in the energy sector. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. (21), 75-91. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-020-09471-x
  10. Kulesza, J. (2016) Due Diligence in International Law. Series: Queen Mary Studies in International Law, Publisher: Brill Nijhoff. (26), 262-275. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004325197_006
  11. Macchi, C. & Van Zeben, J. (2021) Business and human rights implications of climate change litigation: Milieudefensie et al. v Royal Dutch Shell. RECIEL Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law. 30(3), 409-415. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12416
  12. Monnheimer, M. (2021) The Components of the Due Diligence Standard. In: Due Diligence Obligations in International Human Rights Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 116-141. Doi: 10.1017/9781108894784.005' target='_blank'>https://doi.org/doi: 10.1017/9781108894784.005
  13. Peel, J. & Lin, J. (2019) Transnational Climate Litigation: The Contribution of the Global South. American Journal of International Law. 113(4), 679-726. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2019.48
  14. Robinson, S. & D’Arcy, C. (2021) A just alternative to litigation: applying restorative justice to climate-related loss and damage. Climate Policy. 21, (5), 1384-1395 https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1867047
  15. Rock, E. (2021) Superimposing private duties on the exercise of public powers: Sharma v Minister for the Environment. AUSPUBLAW. Available at: https://auspublaw.org/2021/08/superimposing-private-duties-on-the-exercise-of-public-powers-sharma-v-minister-for-the-environment/ [Accessed 21th November 2021].
  16. Sagarin, R. & Turnipseed, M. (2012) The Public Trust Doctrine: Where Ecology Meets Natural Resources Management. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. (37), 473-496. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-031411-165249
  17. Savaresi, A. & Auz, J. (2019) Climate Change Litigation and Human Rights: Pushing the Boundaries. Climate Law. 9(3), 244-262. https://doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00903006
  18. Schiermeier, Q. (2021) Climate science is supporting lawsuits that could help save the world. Nature. (597), 169-171. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02424-7
  19. Setzer, J. & Higham, C. (2021) Global trends in climate litigation: 2021 snapshot. London: Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment and Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science. Available at: https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Global-trends-in-climate-change-litigation_2021-snapshot.pdf [Accessed 19th November 2021].
  20. Stuart-Smith, R. et al. (2021) Filling the evidentiary gap in climate litigation. Nature Climate Change. (11), 651-655. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01086-7
  21. Thieffry, P. (2021) Chapter 20 International Arbitration of Climate-Related Disputes: Prospects for Alternative Dispute Resolution. In: Climate Change Litigation: Global Perspectives. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill | Nijhoff. Pp. 462-480. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004447615_021
  22. Tomlinson, J. (2020) Do we need a theory of legitimate expectations? Legal Studies. 40(2), 286-300. https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2019.29
  23. Zaugg, N. (2021) Business Human Rights emerging as a new field of arbitration?CMS Legal. Available at: https://www.cms-lawnow.com/ealerts/2021/09/business-human-rights-emerging-as-a-new-field-of-arbitration [Accessed 21th November 2021].

Copyright (c) 2022 Ermakova E.P.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies