Reparation for Climate Change: The Successes and Limits of Litigation

4.Conclusion

Litigating climate reparations raises a variety of challenges, as the chapters in this volume have shown. Questions of obligation, causality, (shared) responsibility, legitimacy and temporality all influence the success of a climate case, and its ability to deliver on claims for reparations. Different areas of law may apply different evidentiary tests, liability regimes and approaches to reparation, and these cases also entail questions that go beyond the legal, including political, economic, psychological and scientific ones. While lessons from one jurisdiction or area of law may not always translate directly to another, and must be understood contextually, it is high time to understand that reparation will continue to challenge courts, governments and international mechanisms. This is the first step in understanding how and when reparation is possible, evaluating and critically engaging with different modalities of redress for climate-related harms, and ultimately answering the question: what constitutes success in a climate case?

As this volume has shown, what is considered a success in any given case can vary depending on one’s perspective and expectations. However, it is clear that reparations claims for climate-related damage have the potential to succeed, both internationally and domestically. As these matters continue to be litigated and clarified in court, issues like the requisite degree of due diligence, the need to establish causation, reparation gaps for impacts that cannot be linked to a breach of legal obligations, and frustrations about reparations orders that seem like too little, too late are likely to continue to arise. By examining reparations across various areas of domestic and international law, as well as the mechanisms, methods and meaning of reparations for climate change and the temporality and legitimacy of judicial engagement, the present volume aims to clarify the possibilities for reparations. It concludes that such possibilities, albeit not always easy or perfect, most certainly exist.

Table of cases Domestic Courts

Brazil

ADO 59 (Fundo Amazônia) (Supremo Tribunal Federal, 16 August 2023) (PSB et

al v Brazil (on Amazon Fund)), 382

ADPF 708 (Fundo Clima) (Supremo Tribunal Federal, 7 January 2022) (PSB et al

v Brazil (on Climate Fund)), 382

IBAMA v Indústria, Comércio, Importação e Exportação de Madeiras Floresta

Verde Ltda., no. 1000083-80.2019.4.01.3908 (6th Federal Civil Court, Judicial Section of Amapá, 25 March 2020), 385

IBAMA v V. de Souza Brilhante EIRELI, no. 1003478-16.2018.4.01.3100 (6th Fed-

eral Civil Court, Judicial Section of Amapá, 14 March 2023), 385

Ministério Público Federal and INCRA v Dauro Parreira de Rezende, no. 1005885-

78.2021.4.01.3200 (7th Federal Environmental and Agrarian Court, Judicial Section of Amazonas, pending), 36

São Paulo State Public Defender’s Office v São Paulo State Land Institute Founda-

tion (ITESP) et al, no. 0000522-11.2014.8.26.0172 (7th Federal Environmental and Agrarian Court, Judicial Section of Amazonas, 29 December 2023), under appeal, 36

France

Association Oxfam France et al v État de France nos. 1904967 et al (Tribunal

Administratif de Paris, 14 October 2021), 23

Commune de Grande-Synthe v France no. 427301 (Conseil d’État, 1 July 2021), 136 Cour de cassation 1re civ, 28 January 2010, no. 08-18.837, Bull 2010 I No 22, 350 Cour de cassation 2e civ, 24 September 2009, no. 08-16.305, Bull 2009 I No 187, 350 Les amis de la Terre France et al v TotalEnergies RG 22/53942 (Tribunal Judic-

aire de Paris, 28 February 2023), 305

Survie et al v TotalEnergies RG 22/53943 (Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris, 28 Feb-

ruary 2023), 305

Germany

BVerfG 1 BvR 1565/21 et al (18 January 2022), 118

BVerfG 1 BvR 2661/21 (27 September 2022), 120

BVerfG, pending case filed 24 January 2022 (Steinmetz et al v Germany), 156 BVerfGE 77, 170 (29 October 1987), 114

BVerfGE 79, 174 (30 November 1988), 113

BVerfGE 148, 296 (12 June 2018), 130

BVerfGE 157, 30 (24 March 2021) (Neubauer et al v Germany), 10, 112–117, 136,

139, 143–144, 150–153, 156, 162, 197–199, 202, 260, 318, 322, 374, 379, 381 BVerfGE 161, 63 (23 March 2022), 119

BVerwG 9 A 7.21 (4 May 2022), 121, 199

BVerwG 7 A 9.22 (22 June 2023), 199, 121

Landgericht Braunschweig, 14 February 2023, 6 O 3931/21 (Kaiser et al (Green-

peace) v Volkswagen), 122, 304, 308, 317, 335

Landgericht Detmold, 24 February 2023, 1 O 199/21 (Allhoff-Cramer v Volks-

wagen), 122, 303, 306

Landgericht Essen, 15 December 2016, 2 O 285/15 (Luciano Lliuya v RWE), 266,

301–302, 310

Landgericht Kassel, complaint filed on 10 April 2021 (Barbara Metz et al v Win-

tershall Dea AG) (pending), 304

Landgericht München I, 7 February 2023, 3 O 12581/21 (Metz et al v BMW), 304,

307, 313–314

Landgericht Stuttgart, 13 September 2022, 17 O 789/21 (Metz et al v Mercedes-

Benz), 122, 304, 307, 312–313, 316, 318

Oberlandesgericht Braunschweig, 28 June 2024, Az. 2 U 8/23 (X v Volkswagen),

122

Oberlandesgericht Braunschweig, 6 May 2024 (Hinweisbeschluss), 24 June

2024 (Endbeschluss), 2 U 8/23 (Kaiser et al v Volkswagen), 304, 308, 317–318 Oberlandesgericht Hamm, 28 May 2025, I-5 U 15/17 (Luciano Lliuya v RWE), 18,

240, 266, 268, 293, 301–302, 347, 360, 363 — S. 397 —Oberlandesgericht Hamm, 30 November 2017 and 1 February 2018, 5 U 15/17

(Luciano Lliuya v RWE), 301–302, 310

Oberlandesgericht München, 12 October 2023, 32 U 936/23 (Metz et al v BMW),

304, 307, 313–314, 317

Oberlandesgericht Stuttgart, 8 November 2023, 12 U 170/22 (Metz et al v Mer-

cedes-Benz), 304, 307, 313

Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg, 10 November 2022, 10 S 3542/21

(DUH v Baden-Württemberg), 136

Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg, 16 May 2024, 11 A 31/22 (DUH v

Germany), 136

Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg, 30 November 2023, 11 A 1/23

(Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz e.V v Germany), 120, 136

Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg, 30 November 2023, OVG 11 A

11/22 (DUH and BUND v Germany), 120

Netherlands

Supreme Court of th e Netherlands, Urgenda Foundation v State of the Nether-

lands, 13 January 2020, ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2007, 116, 136, 139–143, 150–155, 163, 174, 197, 199–200, 203–204, 260–262, 300, 380

Supreme Court of th e Netherlands, X et al v Bayer Nederland et al, 9 October

1992, ECLI:NL:HR:1992:ZC0706, 350

The Hague Court of Appeal, Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al,

12 November 2024, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2024:2100, 6, 155, 202, 262, 277, 299, 302, 308–317, 326–327, 332, 360, 364

The Hague Court of Appeal, State of the Netherlands v Urgenda Foundation,

9 October 2018, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2018:2591, 141, 161, 300

The Hague District Court, Dooh and Milieudefensie v Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al,

18 December 2015, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2015:3586, 342

The Hague District Court, Greenpeace Netherlands and 8 citizens of Bonaire v

the Netherlands, 25 September 2024, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2024:14834, 155

The Hague District Court, Kiobel et al v Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al, 23 March

2022, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:4233, 342 — S. 398 —The Hague District Court, Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al,

26 May 2021, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2021:5337, 262, 277, 299, 302, 321, 326

The Hague District Court, RWE v the Netherlands (30 November 2022,

ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2022:12628), 361

The Hague District Court, Uniper Benelux et al v the Netherlands, 20 November

2022, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2022:12653, 361

The Hague District Court, Urgenda Foundation v State of the Netherlands,

24 June 2015, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2015:7196, 140, 300

Switzerland

Cantonal Court of Zug, civil claim filed on 20 January 2023 (Asmania et al v

Holcim) (pending), 18, 240, 266–267, 283, 324, 339

Conciliation authority of the canton of Zug, petition of 11 July 2022 (Asmania

et al v Holcim), 18

Swiss Federal Administrative Court, Uniterre et al v Swiss Department of the

Environment (Swiss Farmers Case), filed 23 October 2024 (pending), 15, 187, 236, 368

Swiss Federal Administrative Court, Judgment A-2992/2017, 27 November

2018 (Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz et al v Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications), 167–168

Swiss Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Commu-

nications, decision concerning Request to Stop Omissions in Climate Protection Pursuant to Art. 25(a) APA and Art. 6 §§ 1 and 13 ECHR, 25 April 2017, 167

Swiss Federal Supreme Court, Judgment 1C_37/2019, 5 May 2020 (Verein Klima-

Seniorinnen Schweiz et al v Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications), 168, 380

Yves Batardon et al v Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy

and Communications, ‘Request to Stop Omissions in Climate Protection Pursuant to Art. 25a APA’ filed 5 March 2024, 187

UK

Barker v Corus (UK) Ltd [2006] UKHL 20, [2006] 2 AC 572, 351

ClientEarth v Shell [2023] EWHC 1137 (Ch), 300, 305, 311, 335, 352

ClientEarth v Shell [2023] EWHC 1897 (Ch), 300, 305, 335, 352

ClientEarth v Shell [2023] EWHC 2182 (Ch), 300, 305, 335

Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002] UKHL 22, [2003] 1 AC 32, 351 Friends of the Earth et al v Secretary of State [2022] EWHC 1841 (Admin), 136 Friends of the Earth et al v Secretary of State [2024] EWHC 995 (Admin), 136 Lungowe v Vedanta [201 9] UKSC 20, 323, 342

McGaughey et al v Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited et al [2022]

EWHC 1233 (Ch), 306

McGaughey et al v Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited et al [2023]

EWCA Civ 873, 306

Okpabi v Shell [2021] UKSC 3, 342

R (Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group et al) v Surrey County Council and

others [2024] UKSC 20, 155

Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd [2011] UKSC 10, [2011] 2 AC 229, 351

US

American Electric Power v Connecticut 564 US 410 (2011), 345

Center for Biological Diversity v National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

538 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir 2008), 74

Collins v Eli Lilly & Co, 342 N.W.2d 37 (Wis 1984), 350

Comer v Murphy Oil 585 F 3d 855 (5th Cir, 16 October 2009), 345

Fentress v ExxonMobil Corp, 304 F Supp 3d 569, 572 (SD Tex 2018), 340

Jesner v Arab Bank, PLC, 584 US 241 (2018), 19, 240, 343–344

Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co, 569 US 108 (2013), 342–344

Microsoft Corp v AT&T Corp, 550 US 437, 454 (2007), 344

Morrison v National Australia Bank Ltd, 561 US (2010), 344

Native Village of Kivalina v Exxon Mobil Corp, 696 F 3d 849 (9th Cir 21 Septem-

ber 2012), cert denied, 133 S Ct 2390 (20 May 2013), 330, 345

Nestle USA, Inc v Doe, 593 US (2021), 344

Ramirez v ExxonMobil, 334 F Supp 3d 832, 840 (ND Tex 2018), 340

Sindell v Abbott Laboratories, 607 P.2d 924 (Cal 1980), 350

Sosa v Alvarez-Machain, 542 US 692, 720 (2004), 343

Story Parchment Company v Paterson Parchment Paper Company 282 US 555

(1931), 86

Other Domestic Cases

A Sud et al v Italy (Civil Court of Rome, 26 February 2024, no. 39415/2021), 137,

154–155

Asghar Leghari v Pakistan WP No 25501/2015 (Lahore High Court, 25 January

2018), 197

Constitutional Court of Colombia, Judgment T-622/16 (10 November 2016), 247 Do-Hyun Kim et al v South Korea [2024] 2020HunMa389, 2021HunMa1264,

2022HunMa854, 2023HunMa846 (Constitutional Court of Korea), 131 Federal Court of Australia, Abraham v Commonwealth Bank of Australia,

no. V879/2017, 8 August 2017, 340

Federal Court of Austr alia, McVeigh v Retail Employees Superannuation Trust

[2019] FCA 14, 340

Friends of the Irish Environment CLG v The Government of Ireland, Ireland and

the Attorney General [2020] IEHC 454, 136

Greenpeace Italia et al v Eni SpA et al (Civil Court of Rome, no. 26468/2023)

(pending), 334

Greenpeace Nordic and Nature & Youth v Energy Ministry [2024] 23-099330TVI-

TOSL/05 (Oslo District Court), 155

Herrera Carrion et al v Ministry of the Environment et al, Provincial Court of

Justice of Sucumbío (Ecuador), No: 21201202000170 (29 July 2021), 198 Lalit Miglani v State of Uttarakhand et al, WPPIL 140/2015 (High Court of Utta-

rakhand) 2017, 247

Mohd Salim v State of Uttarakhand et al, WPPIL 126/2014 (High Court of Utta-

rakhand) 2017, 247

Philippines Supreme Court, Minors Oposa v Factoran, GR No 101083, 30 July — S. 401 —Poznań Court of Appeal, ClientEarth v Enea (8 July 2020, no. I AGa 219/19), 335 Supreme Court of Sweden, Action Regarding Climate Change (19 February

2025, Ö 7177-23), 204

VZW Klimaatzaak v Kingdom of Belgium et al [2021] 2015/4585/A (Brussels

Court of First Instance), 147

VZW Klimaatzaak v Kingdom of Belgium et al [2023] 2022/AR/891(Court of

Appeals of Brussels), 136, 197

African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights

African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Request for an Advisory Opinion

on the Human Rights Obligations of African States in Addressing the Climate Crisis, filed 2 May 2025 (pending), 5, 202, 387

Court of Justice of the European Union

Case C-21/76 Bier BV v Mines de potasse d’Alsace SA [1976] ECR 1735, 341

ECtHR

Aleksanyan v Russia App no 46468/06 (ECtHR), 170

Assanidze v Georgia App no 71503/01 (ECtHR), 170

Asselbourg and Others v Luxembourg App no 29121/95 (ECtHR), 176

Atanasov v Bulgaria App no 6046/08 (ECtHR), 176

Brincat and Others v Malta App no 60908/11 (ECtHR), 169

Carême v France App no 7189/21 (ECtHR), 105

Çiçek and Others v Turkey App no 44837/07 (ECtHR), 179

Cuenca Zarzoso v Spain App no 23383/12 (ECtHR), 179

Cyprus v Turkey (Just Satisfaction) App no 25781/94 (ECtHR), 265

Di Sarno and Others v Italy App no 30765/08 (ECtHR), 179

Duarte Agostinho and Others v Portugal and 32 Others App no 39371/20 (ECtHR),

105, 108, 143, 156, 201, 235, 263, 268

Engels v Germany App no 46906/22 (ECtHR), 118

Fadeyeva v Russia App no 55723/00 (ECtHR), 176

Fatullayev v Azerbaijan App no 40984/07 (ECtHR), 170

Galev v Bulgaria App no 18324/04 (ECtHR), 176

Ireland v UK App no 5310/71 (ECtHR), 265

Jugheli and Others v Georgia App no 38342/05 (ECtHR), 179

Kožul and Others v Bosnia and Herzegovina App no 38695/13 (ECtHR), 176 Kyrtatos v Greece App no 41666/98 (ECtHR), 176

OAO Neftyanaya Kompaniya Yukos v Russia (Just Satisfaction) App no 14902/04

(ECtHR), 370

Oleksandr Volkov v Ukraine App no 21722/11 (ECtHR), 170

Powell and Rayner v UK App no 9310/81 (ECtHR), 179

Tătar v Russia App no 67021/01 (ECtHR), 179

Ukraine v Russia App nos 20958/14 and 38334/18 (ECtHR), 265

Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland App No 53600/20

(ECtHR), 9, 11, 13, 17, 66–68, 72, 105, 107, 128, 130–131, 136, 151, 153–154, 159– 163, 166–170, 173–183, 185–196, 197–200, 202, 235–236, 260, 262–263, 331, 367, 374, 380, 387

X and Y v the Netherlands App no 8978/80 (ECtHR), 179

IACtHR

Advisory Opinion OC-23/17 on the Right to a Healthy Environment (Inter-Amer-

ican Court of Human Rights, 15 November 2017), 15, 197, 277

Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 on Climate Emergency and Human Rights (Inter-

American Court of Human Rights, 29 May 2025), 5, 387, 390

Inhabitants of La Oroya v Peru (Inter-American Court of Human Rights Series

C No. 511, 27 November 2023), 16, 238

Plan de Sánchez Massacre v Guatemala , Reparations and Costs (Inter-American

Court of Human Rights Series C No. 105, 19 November 2004), 9

ICC

Allrise, Communication under Article 15 of the Rome Statute of the ICC regarding the

Commission of Crimes Against Humanity against Environmental Dependents and Defenders in the Brazilian Legal Amazon from January 2019 to present, perpetrated by Brazilian President Jair Messias Bolsonaro and certain former and current principal actors of his administration, 12 October 2021, 382

ITLOS

Request for an Advisory Opinion Submitted by the Commission on Small Island

States on Climate Change and International Law (Advisory Opinion, 21 May 2024) ITLOS Reports 2024, 1, 5–6, 17, 153, 284, 387, 389–390

PCIJ/ICJ

Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v Democratic Republic of the Congo)

(Compensation) [2012] ICJ Rep 324, 84, 215

Application of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or

Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Canada and Netherlands v Syrian Arab Republic) (Provisional Measures) [2023] ICJ Rep 587, 219

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime

of Genocide (The Gambia v Myanmar) (Preliminary Objections) [2022] ICJ Rep 477, 219

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime

of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia and Montenegro) [2007] ICJ Rep 43, 83

Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo

v Uganda) [2005] ICJ Rep 168, 87

Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo

v Uganda) (Reparations) [2022] ICJ Rep 13, 88

Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v Spain) (Sec-

ond Phase) [1970] ICJ Rep 3, 219

Case of the Monetary Gold Removed from Rome in 1943 (Italy v France, United

Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America) (Preliminary Question) [1954] ICJ Rep 19, 220

Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v

Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica Along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v Costa Rica) [2015] ICJ Rep 665, 82

Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v

Nicaragua) (Compensation) [2018] ICJ Rep 15, 85, 101, 222

Corfu Channel Case (Compensation) ICJ Rep 244, 83

Factory at Chorzów (Jurisdiction) [1927] PCIJ Rep Series A No 9, 79, 248 Factory at Chorzów (Merits) [1928] PCIJ Series A No 17, 79–81, 88, 214

Fisheries Jurisdiction (Federal Republic of Germany v Iceland) [1974] ICJ Rep

175, 82

Gabčikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v Slovakia) [1997] ICJ Rep 7, 389 Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius

in 1965 (Advisory Opinion) [2019] ICJ Rep 95, 95, 216

Maritime Delimitation in the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean (Costa Rica v

Nicaragua) and Land Boundary in the Northern Part of Isla Portillos (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) (Merits) [2018] ICJ Rep 139, 94

Obligations Concerning Negotiations Relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms

Race and to Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v United Kingdom) (Preliminary Objections) [2016] ICJ Rep 833, 220, 389

Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v Uruguay) [2010] ICJ Rep 14, 94, 389 Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v Senegal)

[2012] ICJ Rep 422, 219

Request for Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of States in Respect of Climate

Change, transmitted to the Court pursuant to UNGA Res 77/276 (29 March 2023) UN Doc A/RES/77/276, 215, 239, 372, 387

SS Lotus (France v Turkey) [1927] PCIJ Series A, No. 10, 294

Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v Japan) [2014] ICJ Rep 226, 94

UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies

UN Human Rights Committee, Billy et al v Australia, 22 September 2022, UN

Doc CCPR/C/135/D/3624/2019, 14, 197–198, 225, 243–244, 260–261, 268, 278 — S. 405 —UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, Sacchi et al v Argentina et al, 22 Sep-

tember 2021, UN Doc CRC/C/88/D/104/2019 et al, 15, 197, 263, 268, 277, 376 UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Qatar v Kingdom

of Saudi Arabia, 19 October 2020, UN Doc CERD/C/99/5, 265

UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Qatar v United

Arab Emirates, 18 June 2020, UN Doc CERD/C/99/3, 265

UN Human Rights Committee, Teitiota v New Zealand, 23 September 2020, UN

Doc CCPR/C/127/D/2728/2016, 201, 295

International Arbitration

Alabama Claims of the United States of America v Great Britain (14 September

1872) 29 UNRIAA 125, 91

Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission (17 August 2009) 26 UNRIAA 631, 92–93 In the Matter of the Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v India)

(20 December 2013) PCA Case No. 2011-01, 31 UNRIAA 1, 96

Perenco Ecuador Ltd v The Republic of Ecuador and Empresa Estatal Petró leos

del Eduador (Petroecuador) (11 August 2015) ICSID Case No. ARB/08/6, 95 Perenco Ecuador Ltd. v. The Republic of Ecuador and Empresa Estatal Petró leos

del Eduador (Petroecuador) (27 September 2019) Final Award, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/6, 95

South China Sea Arbitration Between the Republic of the Philippines and the

People’s Republic of China, PCA Case No. 2013-19, 33 UNRIAA 153, 94 SUAR v Argentina (22 May 2014) ICSID Case No. ARB/04/4, 96

Trail Smelter (United States v Canada) (1938 and 1941) 3 UNRIAA 1905, 86

Index

A

accountability 24, 112, 126, 129–133, 155, 197–204, 225–228, 232, 239–240, 247,

258–264, 268, 287–291, 333–337

see also corporate responsibility; historical responsibility: state responsibility

adaptation 3, 13, 15, 17, 26, 28–31, 38, 77, 100, 114, 116, 126, 155, 177, 302, 322, 324,

336, 377, 379

see also mitigation

admissibility 118, 144, 167, 168, 176, 219

see also jurisdiction; exhaustion of domestic remedies; standing; victim

advisory opinion 5, 367

of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights 387

of the International Court of Justice 214, 372

of the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea 5, 17, 153, 387

African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) 5, 202, 387 Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) 2, 209, 256 American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) 16

associations 13, 14, 113, 177, 182

attribution science 1, 104, 369, 392

B

balancing of interests 121, 124, 129, 144

behavior 10, 24–25, 35, 63–73, 78, 91–92, 96, 99–107, 129, 315, 329, 335, 378 biodiversity 18, 27, 31, 52, 89, 96, 208, 283, 374, 377

Brussels I Regulation 341

burden of proof 310, 350, 370 butterfly climate litigation 125 C Cancun Adaptation Framework 52, 208, 254 carbon budget (GHG budget, CO2 budget) 115, 130, 144, 153, 192, 304, 392 carbon major 301, 305, 315, 318, 340, 350, 357

carbon neutrality 180, 378

see also climate neutrality

carbon sink 17, 28, 101, 104, 305, 378

causation (causal nexus; causality) 8, 66, 80, 82, 83, 87, 90, 101, 103, 106, 107,

261, 322, 325, 328, 360, 387

adequate 310, 323, 351

conditio sine qua non-formula 348 — S. 408 —minimal 350

natural 310

cessation 91, 185, 224

child/children 198, 235–236, 263, 276–277

see also future generations; victim; vulnerability

choice of law 341, 342

civil society organizations see non-governmental organizations

class action 19, 339, 351, 370

climate harm see damage

climate neutrality 112, 114, 145, 306, 313

see also carbon neutrality

climate risk 1, 2, 27, 43, 48–51, 59, 60, 121, 147, 165, 322, 328, 330, 373

see also risk

climate science see science

colonialism 213, 230, 231, 295

common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities

(CBDR-RC) 117, 138, 151, 193, 276, 290

compensation 45, 50, 56–59, 68, 78–87, 97, 261

calculation 23, 24, 38, 81–96, 187, 368

economic 24, 34, 186, 245

limits 83

loss and damage fund 11, 208

see also reparation; loss and damage fund Conference of the Parties (COP) 2, 254 corporate climate citizenship 336 corporate responsibility 19, 122, 239, 316, 346, 358, 360, 361, 363

Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) 332, 353, 359 Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) 332, 352, 359

corporation(s) 6, 7, 11, 18, 121, 315, 318, 323, 335, 344, 357, 358, 362

critical date 290–292, 392

customary international law 218–219, 345, 375, 388

D damage

calculation 8, 10, 15, 23, 24, 29–39, 53, 68–70, 81, 82, 90–106, 324, 368, 372, 375, 386

calculation methodology (qualitative, quantitative, intuitive) 10, 75, 85, 89, 102

see also compensation

economic/non-economic 10, 26–29, 35, 38, 52–61, 370, 372

ecosystem services approach 90, 242 — S. 409 —future 13, 28, 30, 40, 42, 101, 328, 379

global sum approach 10, 88

loss of assets (damnum emergens) 306, 370

loss of profit (lucrum cessans) 35, 306

marginal 31, 33, 34

material 36, 80, 101, 107, 137, 325

moral 23, 25, 83, 101, 106, 243

non-pecuniary see moral

overall valuation approach 10, 86

pecuniary see material

punitive 91, 92, 370

replacement costs approach 85

transboundary 5, 36, 80, 102, 108, 237, 263, 389–391

valuation 35, 66, 72–76, 84–95, 241, 246, 324, 368

deforestation 17, 36, 37, 38, 102, 305, 378, 384

democracy 70, 118, 125–133, 191, 313, 374

developed countries see industrialized countries

developing countries 2, 33, 54, 55, 59, 61, 88, 94, 200, 207, 213, 257, 288, 378

disappearance of species 24, 35, 91, 362 disclosure 352

displacement 27, 55, 244, 277–279, 295, 370, 372

distributive (climate) justice 7, 33, 34, 55, 99, 125, 133, 134, 229, 232, 235, 254,

256, 380

doctrine of forum non conveniens 342, 355, 359 drop in the ocean argument 151, 203, 369

due diligence 5, 180, 193, 218, 319, 369, 377, 389–393

duty of care 115, 136, 140, 147, 148, 163, 308, 314, 369, 375

duty to protect 113–114, 122, 126, 140–148, 159, 163, 170, 179, 305, 308, 369

E

economics 10, 23–36, 38, 52, 55, 58, 100, 102, 315, 328

ecosystems 89, 104, 324

ecosystem services approach 85, 90 emissions trading system 361

enforcement of court rulings 142, 149, 157, 191, 199–200, 354

environmental damage 35, 79, 81, 85–97, 178, 325, 334, 384

equity 87, 92, 94

erga omnes obligation 18, 91

equity see distributive (climate) justice

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) 5, 13, 67, 105, 146–147, 159, — S. 410 —European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) 4, 7, 9, 67, 100, 105–108, 118, 130,

142, 159, 176, 367, 370

see also admissibility; exhaustion of domestic remedies; jurisdiction; remedy/remedies; victim

European Union 112, 118, 144, 265, 341, 359

exhaustion of domestic remedies 235

extinction of species see disappearance of species

F

fair share 116–117, 144, 156, 172–173, 291, 362

fragmentation of international law 108, 244

future generations 9, 16, 56, 113, 128, 152, 198, 276, 325, 361, 378

see also victim

G GHG reduction

goals 34, 145

targets 112–113, 130, 135, 143–145, 166, 193, 336

Glasgow Dialogue 251

Global North see industrialized countries

Global South see developing countries

Green Climate Fund 379 H

harm see damage; loss and damage fund

historical emissions 17, 36, 257, 328, 349, 374, 378, 391

historical responsibility 213, 257, 289, 290, 374

human rights 16, 68, 78, 93–94, 107–108, 127–128, 136, 143, 159, 203, 260, 299,

305–309, 314, 316, 334, 358, 367, 375, 379

I

implementation of judgments 10, 68, 161, 188–191, 261, 264, 376

see also remedy/remedies

indigenous

communities 14, 105, 198, 238, 246

people 9, 16

indigenous environmental justice 9, 105, 278

industrialized countries 33, 151, 166, 200, 203, 207, 211–213, 258, 288, 378, 391 insurance 10, 42–61, 100, 103, 209, 255

mandatory by law 372

private 57, 59, 371

public 54, 55, 57

reinsurance 42–47, 57, 60–61

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 16

Inter-American Court of Human Rights 5, 8, 9, 16

see also advisory opinion

intergenerational equity 76, 77

intergenerational fairness 90, 115, 116, 123, 124, 134, 138, 199 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 1–2, 99, 104, 115, 139,

165, 168, 172, 180, 213, 300, 327, 348, 374, 379–380

international consensus 117, 156, 202, 308, 314, 374

International Court of Justice (ICJ) 5, 8, 17, 79, 80–95, 100, 108, 208

see also advisory opinion

352International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 14, 300 International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation (IFRS) International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) 352 International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) 5, 8, 17, 390 see also advisory opinion intersectional feminism and vulnerability 271–274, 284 see also victim; vulnerability

J

judicial restraint 123, 204, 313, 317, 375

jurisdiction 91, 108, 202, 218, 341–343, 359

extraterritorial 108, 116, 201, 263, 345

territorial 263, 387

see also spatial dimension of litigation

justiciability 176, 218, 225

just satisfaction 13, 67–68, 105, 169, 191, 276

see also remedy/remedies; reparation

K Kyoto Protocol 209 L

law and economics 25, 33–35, 100, 107, 241, 299, 315, 323, 328, 334

see also economics

legislator 111–118, 123, 131, 188, 189–199, 307, 308, 313, 318, 328, 331, 374 liability 211, 329

fault-based 346, 347, 368

for environmental damage 137, 325, 383

in economics 23–25, 35

in law 35, 38, 254

partial 261, 350

solidary 349

strict 368, 388

litigation 23, 24, 34, 38, 47, 50, 66, 74, 75 — S. 412 —domestic 6, 7, 73, 111, 118, 119, 143, 154, 163, 227, 262, 346, 354, 373, 382 framework 135, 136, 139, 151, 155

horizontal 301, 318, 370, 375

impact (direct; indirect; legal; political) 7, 111, 123, 130, 135–139, 142–150, 153, 156–157, 166, 175, 183, 196–197, 204, 355, 362–363

inter-state 5, 81, 217, 264, 287, 376

oblique 262, 265

private law 11, 18–19, 302, 316, 319, 323, 370, 375

public 11, 156

public interest 121, 150, 362

public law 323

shareholder-led 11, 19, 335, 351, 355, 360, 370

strategic 126, 160–161, 166–170, 319, 325, 340, 362

success 7, 111, 125–126, 135–138, 150, 154, 157, 160–162, 175, 184–187, 195–198, 200, 248, 268, 299, 319, 323–324, 357, 362–363, 367, 376, 393

transnational 17, 263

vertical 5, 260, 318, 361

locus standi see standing

loss see damage

loss and damage fund 11, 41, 54–55, 61, 72, 208–212, 237, 251, 257, 263–269,

288–289, 368

see also burden of proof; class action; compensation; corporation(s); damage; public fund; Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM)

Lugano Convention (LC) 341 M

margin of appreciation 131, 180–181, 190

marine environment 5, 35, 96, 153, 250, 280, 284

media 130, 175, 187–188, 195, 199, 226, 248, 325, 363

mitigation 3, 5, 13–17, 26–29, 34, 38, 67, 72, 77, 100, 121, 126, 128, 136, 151, 155,

188, 260, 309, 322, 324, 327, 377, 379

see also adaption

Monetary Gold principle 220

monetization 31, 47, 50, 51–53, 70–78, 279

moral disengagement 65, 69 N Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) 3, 252, 379, 390

natural disaster see weather events

net zero GHG emissions see climate neutrality

no harm rule 72, 141, 389

non-governmental organizations (NGOs) 118, 137, 146, 303, 326, 355

O OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business

Conduct 309, 358

ozone layer 89, 377 P

Paris Agreement 3, 16, 112, 132, 141, 151, 304, 314, 316, 362, 379, 383, 389

215

Paris Agreement Implementation and Compliance Committee (PAICC)

political question doctrine 330, 343, 345, 359

polluter pays principle 23–24, 35, 65, 67, 209, 249, 255, 369, 383–384, 388

pollution 53

positive obligations 13, 116, 120, 130, 141, 144, 148, 151, 180–181, 195

precautionary principle 115, 123, 138 principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective

capabilities (CBDR-RC) 116–117, 138, 193, 276, 290, 390

procedural justice 95, 160–161, 181, 185, 369–370

psychology see behavior

public fund 253, 351, 368, 377

see also insurance

public interest litigation see litigation R

rain forest see carbon sink

regulatory impact 111, 117, 122, 162

remedy/remedies 7, 67, 107–108, 161, 324, 328

for future damage 169, 255

for immaterial damage 252

for material damage 252

general 9, 16, 169, 323, 325, 367

individual 9, 169, 323, 325

just satisfaction (Art. 41 ECHR) 9, 169, 182, 370

see also implementation of judgments

reparation 6, 8, 64–68, 78–79, 88, 96, 221

capacity 92, 367, 376, 377

full 38, 80, 94, 231, 233, 236

partial 90, 267

restitution 81, 186, 223

satisfaction 81, 223

see also state responsibility

resilience 55, 58–60, 294, 377

see also vulnerability

restitution see reparation — S. 414 —right based claims see litigation

right to a healthy environment 16, 41, 131, 136, 197, 203, 383 right to life 9, 13, 16, 113, 136, 140, 147, 159, 168

right to private life 13, 14, 140, 168, 176, 307

right to property 9, 15, 16, 18, 113, 137, 303, 368

Rio Declaration 217 risk

acceptability 10, 330, 361

assessment 10, 43, 47–50, 60, 255, 347

creeping 1, 374

prediction 42, 48–49, 60, 373

see also insurance

Rome II Regulation 342

rule of law 7, 112, 376

S Santiago Network 251

satisfaction see reparation

science 43, 60, 65

best available 74, 151, 155, 192

in courts 8, 13, 138, 151, 202, 322, 358, 380

scientific

consensus 33, 103, 138, 147, 156, 165, 171, 202, 309, 379

evidence 27, 88, 115, 143, 155, 165, 170, 180, 202

experts 94, 95, 102–103, 108, 115, 171–172, 379, 380

uncertainity 172

uncertainty 114, 123, 148, 173

see also Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) sea-level rise 28–29, 51–55, 104, 349

separation of powers 125, 147, 312, 343

shareholder 11, 19, 324, 340, 351, 355

see also corporation(s)

small island states 2, 5, 54, 153, 209, 214–218, 221, 252–253, 262, 265, 280,

370

Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) 32–38, 73–77, 100, 102, 282, 331, 385 soft law 141, 309, 326, 358

spatial dimension of litigation 17, 302, 311, 360

see also jurisdiction

standing 13, 17, 72, 113, 147, 165, 176–177, 182, 219, 305, 323, 355, 359

see also associations; victim

state-centric rights and duties see duty to protect; state responsibility — S. 415 —state responsibility 6, 8, 79, 91, 105, 116, 153, 289

Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA) 9, 80, 92, 207, 391

internationally wrongful act 6, 84, 88, 90, 101, 217, 375

see also compensation; historical responsibility; reparation

strategic litigation see litigation Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) 353 T Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) 46, 336, 352 temperature 1.5 degree Celsius 1, 16, 112, 115–117, 151–152, 390 2 degrees Celsius 3, 123, 133, 144, 390 limit 151, 170–172 rise 1, 46, 51, 348–350, 390 temporal dimension of litigation 276, 311, 325, 347, 360, 362, 369, 377, 380 see also critical date; historical emissions; historical responsibility Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) 236, 241, 248 tipping points 113, 152, 282, 392 tort law 136–137, 292, 299, 304, 308, 310, 318, 330, 339, 346, 350, 355, 358, 375 truth 103, 232–236, 240–242, 250, 272, 296 U uncertainty 33–34, 42–43, 48–51, 60, 84, 86–89, 202, 380 United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 8, 15, 367 United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) 90, 95, 104 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 2, 27, 54, 116, 132, 141, 208, 253, 389 United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights 309, 358 United Nations Human Rights Committee 14, 197, 201, 225, 260, 264, 268, 278, 295 unlawfulness 86, 91–92, 102, 106–107, 306–309, 346–347, 369, 380 US Alien Tort Statute (ATS) 19, 322, 339, 343, 355

Vvalue of a statistical life 75, 77

victim 105, 258

direct 13, 177

indirect 177

potential 177

see also future generations; standing

vulnerability 100 of certain groups 13, 106, 127, 164, 167, 170, 186, 198, 202, 391 — S. 416 —of certain regions 4, 6, 17, 202, 258, 259, 391

see also child/children

W Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) 54, 210, 254

weather events 1, 41, 43, 46, 49–52, 54, 56, 60–61, 104

drought 178, 303, 370

flooding 178, 303, 310, 311, 346, 350, 370

heat waves 105, 350

see also displacement — S. 418 —sui generis is an association dedicated to the promotion of free access to legal literature, court decisions, decisions of authorities and legislative materials. Since 2014, a legal open access journal has been published under the label sui generis. In 2019, the sui generis publishing house was founded.

In this series, legal dissertations and postdoctoral theses, as well as textbooks and specialized publications, are made available to a wide audience. The books in this series are published in printed and online versions. The digital version is freely accessible worldwide (open access). The copyright remains with the authors; the works are published under a Creative Commons licence.

Published in the sui generis series,

edited by Marc Thommen.

1st edition, 27 February 2026

© 2026 Helen Keller, Corina Heri

This work has been published under a Creative Commons license which requires only the attribution of the author when being reused erfordert (CC BY 4.0 — https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).

ISBN: 978-3-907297-73-5

DOI: 10.38107/073

Proofreading: Christoph Meyer

Design: Müller+Hess, Basel

Print: Ebner & Spiegel, Ulm

Central distribution warehouse in the EU is GVA Göttingen,

Anna-Vandenhoeck-Ring 36, 37081 Göttingen, [email protected]

sui generis Verlag, Viaduktstrasse 21, 8005 Zurich

www.suigeneris-verlag.ch, [email protected]

REPARATIO

FOR CLIMAT

CHANGE

Climate lawsuits have reached the courts. While the initial rulings primarily address the obligations of states and major CO2 emitters, future cases will require courts to consider issues of compensation. This volume aims to shed light on the following questions: How can compensation for climate loss and damage be claimed? At what point can CO2 emissions be considered harmful? How do the courts engage with climate science? How is climate damage quantified? How should historical CO2 emissions be assessed to determine a just amount of compensation in an intergenerational and transnational context? Bringing together legal experts from private and public law as well as experts from the insurance industry, the social sciences, and economics, this volume is essential reading for anyone concerned with climate damage.

sui generis

ISBN 978-3-907297-73-5

DOI 10.38107/073