Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the ...

Research

Electronic data

View graph of relations

The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Forthcoming

Standard

The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights. / Letwin, Jeremy.
In: European Convention on Human Rights Law Review, 29.01.2025.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Letwin, J 2025, 'The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights', European Convention on Human Rights Law Review.

APA

Letwin, J. (in press). The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights. European Convention on Human Rights Law Review.

Vancouver

Letwin J. The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights. European Convention on Human Rights Law Review. 2025 Jan 29.

Author

Letwin, Jeremy. / The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights. In: European Convention on Human Rights Law Review. 2025.

Bibtex

@article{c3c3ede07cfe4ba78b3b71d851bce7e4,
title = "The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights",
abstract = "In KlimaSeniorinnen, the ECtHR opened the door to climate change litigation under the ECHR. How far will the Court go in imposing obligations on states to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change in the many future cases inevitably to come? I identify four limits on the Court{\textquoteright}s ambitions in future climate change cases. I argue that these four limits are deeply grounded in the Court{\textquoteright}s pre-existing environmental jurisprudence and are congruent with the judgment in KlimaSeniorinnen. They represent red lines that the Court will not cross in future climate change judgments if it wants to maintain coherence with its wider environmental jurisprudence going forward. Respecting these four limits will help the Court to avoid backlash and to protect its perceived legitimacy.",
author = "Jeremy Letwin",
year = "2025",
month = jan,
day = "29",
language = "English",
journal = "European Convention on Human Rights Law Review",
issn = "2666-3236",
publisher = "Martinus Nijhoff Publishers/ Brill Academic",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Limits of Climate Change Litigation in the European Court of Human Rights

AU - Letwin, Jeremy

PY - 2025/1/29

Y1 - 2025/1/29

N2 - In KlimaSeniorinnen, the ECtHR opened the door to climate change litigation under the ECHR. How far will the Court go in imposing obligations on states to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change in the many future cases inevitably to come? I identify four limits on the Court’s ambitions in future climate change cases. I argue that these four limits are deeply grounded in the Court’s pre-existing environmental jurisprudence and are congruent with the judgment in KlimaSeniorinnen. They represent red lines that the Court will not cross in future climate change judgments if it wants to maintain coherence with its wider environmental jurisprudence going forward. Respecting these four limits will help the Court to avoid backlash and to protect its perceived legitimacy.

AB - In KlimaSeniorinnen, the ECtHR opened the door to climate change litigation under the ECHR. How far will the Court go in imposing obligations on states to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change in the many future cases inevitably to come? I identify four limits on the Court’s ambitions in future climate change cases. I argue that these four limits are deeply grounded in the Court’s pre-existing environmental jurisprudence and are congruent with the judgment in KlimaSeniorinnen. They represent red lines that the Court will not cross in future climate change judgments if it wants to maintain coherence with its wider environmental jurisprudence going forward. Respecting these four limits will help the Court to avoid backlash and to protect its perceived legitimacy.

M3 - Journal article

JO - European Convention on Human Rights Law Review

JF - European Convention on Human Rights Law Review

SN - 2666-3236

ER -