The Decision of the Irish Supreme Court in Friends of the Irish Environment v Ireland: A Significant Step Towards Government Accountability for Climate Change?

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 163-176
Author(s):  
C. Renglet
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-42
Author(s):  
Nathan T. Tagg ◽  
Tahseen Jafry

Meeting the global challenge of preventing global temperatures rising by more than two degrees Celsius by the end of the century is not going to be easy. With the majority of carbon emissions coming from the developed nations, there is an onus of responsibility on these nations to support the developing nations, who have contributed the least. This would be a significant step towards delivering climate justice. This article demonstrates that gaining traction and support for climate justice can be achieved through the power of education, by translating contemporary research for children, connecting them with it and embedding them in it. Working with 154 primary school children in Glasgow, this article provides: (1) an overview of a climate justice research project, Water for ALL, which was conducted in Malawi and Zambia; and (2) reflection on the challenges of translating the research findings for use in the classroom so it becomes not only meaningful but personally engages children with current issues of climate in/justice. Our findings highlight that it is possible to connect children not only with a complex topic, but also with research findings through the development of practical learning classroom exercises. Arriving at those classroom exercises is a 'process' that requires putting the research through a process of translation and communication before it can be shared with children. The interface between research and education lends itself to the power of practically based science-led education. As shown in this example, the Water for ALL research project has given the school children a sense of 'ownership' of climate change and climate in/justice, to the extent that they can highlight their role and contributions to addressing the climate challenge.


Author(s):  
Diya Uberoi

In an effort to protect citizens’ right-to-health, the Supreme Court of India on April 8th ordered the government to make COVID-19 testing free in all private hospitals and labs. The Court’s decision in Sudhi v. Union of India marked a significant step towards ensuring that all people, especially poor workers in the informal sector have access to necessary care. Five days later, however, after facing objections from private companies and the state, the Supreme Court reversed its previous order and made testing free for only those living below the poverty line, an obligation already mandated under the National Health Policy Scheme.This commentary suggests that judicial action should be strengthened, not hampered, in times of global health crisis. While no state has unlimited resources to ensure the protection of health, the judiciary should be emboldened to hold the state to account.   


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-234
Author(s):  
Ole W. Pedersen

Climate change litigators are increasingly relying on a range of different jurisdictional avenues and legal regimes. The recent Urgenda decision by the Dutch Supreme Court provides a surprisingly rare snapshot of the relevance of human rights law  to climate change litigation. Focusing on the Supreme Court's reliance on the environmental rights case law from the ECHR, this case note argues that climate change and human rights adjudications takes the form of an adjudicatory network. This network creates spaces for domestic courts to develop contingent responses to emerging climate change claims.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-132
Author(s):  
Edward Mitchell

In R ( on the application of Plan B Earth) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWCA Civ 214, [2020] 2 WLUK 372, the Court of Appeal held that the Secretary of State had acted unlawfully by failing to take into account the UK’s commitments in the 2015 Paris Agreement when he decided to designate a policy formulated to enable the construction of a third runway at Heathrow airport as a ‘national policy statement’ under the Planning Act 2008. An appeal to the Supreme Court is pending. The outcome of that appeal should help to clarify the legal significance of the Paris Agreement and will have significant implications both for expansion at Heathrow airport, for other major infrastructure projects and for other planning and environmental litigation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124
Author(s):  
Irene Antonopoulos

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 344-349
Author(s):  
Joanne Hawkins

Plans for a third runway at Heathrow airport have been the subject of ongoing melodrama. In the latest instalment, (R (on the application of Friends of the Earth Ltd and others) v Heathrow Airport Ltd [2020] UKSC 52), the Supreme Court comprehensively reversed the Court of Appeal's judgment, rejecting the finding that the decision maker acted unlawfully in designating the Airport National Policy Statement (ANPS). This commentary highlights that the Supreme Court judgment signals a missed opportunity to develop a more creative approach to the polycentric and dynamic issue of climate change in the context of nationally significant infrastructure projects. It argues that the decision is, if not wholly unexpected, a disappointing one.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document