This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
A German court Tuesday rejected a lawsuit filed by environmental group Deutsche Umwelthilfe intended to bar Mercedes-Benz from selling cars with combustion engines that emit greenhouse gases after 2030. ” The organization believes that “[o]nly higher courts will clarify this fundamental question.”
Introduction On November 12, 2024, the Dutch Court of Appeal in The Hague issued its eagerly awaited appeals judgment in Milieudefensie (Friends of the Earth Netherlands) and others v. The applicants sought an injunction declaring that Shell is legally bound to reduce its carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 45% below 2019 levels by 2030.
On November 26, 2024, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic dismissed the countrys first strategic climate case ( Klimatick aloba R v. Czech Republic ), finding that the European Union (EU)s commitment to reduce emissions by 55 percent by 2030 is a collective obligation, not an individual one for Czechia.
Credit: Christine Olsson/TT On February 19, 2025, the Swedish Supreme Court dismissed the Aurora case ( Anton Foley and others v Sweden ), the first systemic climate change case brought in Sweden. It sheds light on how national courts may interpret KlimaSeniorinnen , particularly on separation of powers.
After landmark decisions in Urgenda and Shell , plaintiffs are asking a Dutch court to weigh in on a case that forms part of a new set of pioneering climate litigation cases. The case follows a series of damning non-binding decisions by the Dutch national Advertising Code Commission (ACC) on similar campaigns by KLM and Shell.
It outlines trends, legislative changes, and Supreme Court precedents since 1996, with a focus on judgments involving the United States and China. The study examines European courtdecisions, domestic legislation, and international projects aimed at stabilizing the legal status of such children.
Indonesia’s 2030 target projects that its energy emissions will increase above 2010 levels by 268%; waste emissions will increase by 236%; industrial process emissions will increase by 93%; agricultural emissions will increase by 8%; and forestry emissions will increase by 5%.
Federal Court Found Flaws in New Climate Change Analysis for Wyoming Oil and Gas Leases. The federal district court for the District of Columbia ruled that the U.S. Second, the court concluded that BLM should have calculated and considered total greenhouse emissions, instead of merely relying on comparisons of yearly emission rates.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district courtdecision that vacated the listing of the Beringia distinct population segment (DPS) of the Pacific bearded seal subspecies as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. Climate Litigation Chart (Update #92): FEATURED CASE.
On June 15, 2022, the Prague Municipal Court, a first instance administrative court, decided in favor of the plaintiffs in the first Czech strategic climate case ( Klimatická žaloba ?R This blog post provides a preliminary analysis of the decision and discusses some interesting remarks made by the court. On standing.
The developer challenged the denial in court and won but, in the meantime, an Illinois court overturned that state’s approval of the line, again blocking development. greenhouse gas emissions by 50 to 52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.
Hans van Loon (Institut de Droit International) gave an overview of the relationship between Private International Law and the UN Sustainable Development Goals 2030. He outlined the challenge of reconciling economic development with sustainability and the contribution PIL can make towards this goal.
This contribution is not meant to assess the Achmea judgment of the European Court of Justice. The decision of the OLG München (Higher Regional Court of Munich) regarding a brokerage contract shows that it is not always possible to determine the place of main performance. Hess: Exequatur sur exequatur vaut?
Federal Court in Rhode Island Allowed Failure-to-Adapt Claims to Proceed. The federal district court for the District of Rhode Island for the most part denied a motion to dismiss a citizen suit asserting that Shell Oil Products US and other defendants (Shell) failed to prepare a terminal in Providence for the impacts of climate change.
These statutes proscribe unlawful conduct in general terms, establishing broad principles as to how markets should operate, leaving courts and regulatory authorities to inquire into the facts of a given challenged business practice. The banks pledge to develop interim 2030 GHG reduction targets as well.
Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to adequately analyze the climate change and environmental justice impacts of two liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals on the Brownsville Shipping Channel in Texas and two pipelines that would carry LNG to one of the terminals. 20-1045 (D.C.
6] At the colloquium, former Delaware Supreme Court Chief Justice Leo Strine reiterated that corporate fiduciary duties should continue to focus solely on the interests of profits for shareholders. [7] 9] See Iva Lea Aurer, Guest Commentary: An Assessment of the Hague District CourtsDecision in Milieudefensie et al.
In Baltimore’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies, Supreme Court Held that Appellate Review of Remand Order Extends to All Grounds for Removal. In a 7-1 decision, the U.S. The Court’sdecision concerned the interpretation of 28 U.S.C. In addition, the Court cited its decision in Yamaha Motor Corp.,
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) approval of an offshore drilling and production facility off the coast of Alaska in the Beaufort Sea, finding that BOEM failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS.
Louisiana Federal Court Blocked Biden Administration “Pause” on New Oil and Gas Leases. The federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a nationwide preliminary injunction barring the Biden administration from implementing a “Pause” on new oil and natural gas leases on public lands or in offshore waters.
Circuit Decision Vacating Affordable Clean Energy Rule. Supreme Court seeking review of the D.C. The states argued that the Supreme Court’s stay of the Clean Power Plan while it was under review by the D.C. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. FEATURED CASE. States and Coal Company Sought Review of D.C. 20-1530 (U.S. 20-1531 (U.S.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of New York City’s lawsuit seeking climate change damages from oil companies. The Second Circuit’s decision largely followed the reasoning of the district court’s 2018 decision. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. Creative Commons, NYC Manhattan Skyline.
Washington Supreme Court Said Climate Activist Was Entitled to Present Necessity Defense Based on Evidence that Legal Alternatives Were Not “Truly Reasonable”. The Supreme Court reversed an intermediate appellate court’sdecision affirming a superior court determination that the defendant could not present a necessity defense.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content