We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 April 2024
CASE
A government meets the EU target of 20% reduction of greenhouse gases before the end of 2025 compared to the emission level in 1990. However, it has been stated in scientific research that the minimum reduction should be 25% compared to the 1990 level in order to have a 50–66% chance of staying below a 2°C increase in global temperatures by 2100 compared to the average temperature in 1800. Scientific research showed that this 2°C maximum increase is necessary to prevent a climate crisis; however, more recent scientific research shows that the preventions of a climate crisis requires a maximum temperature rise of only 1.5°C, which thus reduces the carbon budget that remains in order to prevent a climate crisis in the future.
A group of inhabitants go to court and ask for an injunction or court order requiring the government to reduce its emission of greenhouse gases by 25% at the end of 2025 compared to its emission level in 1990. The motivation behind this court order is the real threat of the violation of positive obligations by the state/government under Article 2 and/or 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and/or that the due standard of care will be breached. Would the application succeed ?
DISCUSSIONS
AUSTRIA
Matthias Dangl and Georg E Kodek
I. Operative Rules
Under Austrian law, no injunctive relief would be available. The most important reason is that the relevant international conventions and EU goals are not selfexecuting and/or do not provide sufficiently identifiable enforceable standards. There is a Climate Protection Law (Klimaschutzgesetz), but this in essence only programmatically refers to future negotiations.
Legal Formants
The connection between climate change and human rights is too slim to warrant enforceable rights to specific measures. In the absence of sufficiently identifiable standards, the question of which measures have to be taken to stop the climate change is not justiciable. Certainly, it is not justiciable in private law, otherwise, extreme consequences would result. As such, tourists could be sued for causing pollution by ‘unnecessary travels’
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.
