In the case of Waratah Coal Pty Ltd v. Youth Verdict Ltd, young people in Australia challenged, on human rights grounds, the applications submitted by Waratah Coal Pty Ltd for a new coal mine project.
A group of 16 children affected by the consequences of climate change filed a complaint against six States for violating their rights by failing to fulfil the States’ international commitments to reduce emissions. The claim was deemed inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies but recognised the extraterritorial application of human rights obligations in the context of climate change and the victim status of the authors of the complaint.
In the case of Friday for Future Estonia v Eesti Energia, a youth-led NGO filed a claim contesting the grant of a permit to construct an oil plant, claiming that it was in breach of international obligations to mitigate climate change.
Six young climate activists filed a claim against Brazil’s former Ministers of the Environment and International Affairs and the federal government for decreasing the country's ambitions to reduce emissions within their updated 2020 NDCs under the Paris Agreement. The claimants’ request for urgent injunctive relief due to the urgency of the climate crisis was denied, and the final judgement is still pending.
The case of Mathur v. Ontario represents the first case in Ontario in which the court ruled that climate change may threaten fundamental rights under the Constitutional Law. By Leon Qiu Country: Canada Defendants: State of Ontario Law Applied: Canadian Charter of Rights and FreedomConstitutional LawEnvironmental LawDomestic Human Rights Law Key words: Mitigation Human Rights...
by Leon Qiu Eight young people brought a complaint against the State of Florida claiming violations to their human rights of life, liberty, and property. They alleged that in creating and operating a fossil fuel-based energy system their right to pursue happiness was adversely affected. The complaint was dismissed on the grounds that it raised...
by Leon Qiu In Aji P. v. State of Washington, the youth petitioners argued in a judicial review claim that the fundamental human right to a healthful and pleasant environment was not upheld by Washington’s use of fossil-fuel-based energy and transportation systems. Greenhouse gases emitted from these systems thereby failed to mitigate against climate change....
by Anna Bortolussi Six Alaskan children brought a complaint against the State of Alaska, alleging that the state was in violation of the Alaska Constitution and in breach of their public trust duty by failing to, among other things, reduce and limit GHGs emissions. They claimed that this breach was affecting their present and future...
by Anna Bortolussi Ten youths brought a complaint against the State of Brandenburg, Germany, claiming that the state’s failure to set adequate climate protection goals and emission reduction paths was in violation of domestic environmental law and constitutional law. They alleged that failure to mitigate would have effects on the plaintiffs’ human rights and health,...
by Anna Bortolussi Ten youths brought a complaint against the State of Bavaria, Germany, claiming that the state’s failure to set adequate climate protection goals and emission reduction paths was in violation of domestic environmental law and constitutional law. They alleged that failure to mitigate would have effects on the plaintiffs’ human rights and health,...