The legacy of the first wave of framework climate cases in Europe

It is ten years since the District Court of The Hague ruled in favour of Urgenda and five years since the Supreme Court of Ireland quashed Ireland’s first National Mitigation Plan in Friends of the Irish Environment v Government of Ireland (‘Climate Case Ireland’). The latter case was inspired by the former, and the teams worked closely together on the Irish case, indicative of the transnational dialogue that distinguishes the first wave of framework climate cases in Europe. Climate Case Ireland was a relatively early example of such framework litigation, having commenced in October 2017 and having been decided by the High Court of Ireland in 2019 and by the Supreme Court in 2020. The case ultimately succeeded in July 2020 before the Supreme Court, becoming only the second case globally (after Urgenda in the Netherlands) in which an apex court ordered a government to revise its national climate policy. This article, first, provides an account of the origins and unfolding of Climate Case Ireland, as well as an analysis of the judgment; second, identifies some lessons from the experience and addresses some impacts and criticisms of the case, now with the benefit of five years of hindsight; and third, offers reflections on the legacy of the case and of other early framework cases, and, more generally, on the choice of human rights-based claims versus (or in addition to) statutory claims in climate litigation.

Climate change · Common law · High Court · Irish · Statutory law · Supreme court · Climate Change and Geoengineering · Environmental law and policy · International Environmental Law and Policies