The well anticipated judgment of the Hague Court of Appeal in the case of The Netherlands vs. Urgenda has given right to Urgenda. The Netherlands must, based on its duty of care, ensure that national greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by at least 25% by 2020. This is a remarkable development. Bravo!
One more climate case, this time before the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, against Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany and Turkey, arguing that these countries aren't doing enough to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.
Washington Post (20 March 2019), reporting on a ruling that blocks drilling on 300,000 acres of leases in Wyoming.
(2018) Nature Climate Change
"The courts have played a central role in climate policy, including the landmark Supreme Court case that led to the mandatory regulation of greenhouse gases by the United States. A wide variety of litigants have used the courts to affect policy outcomes at all scales. Therefore, to understand how the court addresses climate change is critical. Here we constructed and analysed a database of all the United State domestic climate lawsuits 1990–2016 (873), and collected qualitative data in the form of 78 in-depth interviews with litigants, involved scientists and advocates. We find proregulation litigants tend to win renewable energy and energy efficiency cases, and more frequently lose coal-fired power plant cases. Strategies such as the use of climate science and other science as well as collaboration in specific types of coalitions affect the outcomes of cases. Efforts to affect climate policy should consider these trends and outcomes."