Other global
Legal actions

European Courts

In September 2020, inspired by Juliana v. United States and after consulting with Our Children’s Trust, six Portuguese youth, supported by the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN), filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights against 33 countries. The complaint alleges that the countries have violated the youth’s fundamental rights by failing to comply with their positive obligations under Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in light of commitments the countries made under the 2015 Paris Agreement. The youth also allege a violation of Article 14 in that the countries have discriminated against them by failing to sufficiently act to curb climate change, a phenomenon which disproportionately impacts young people. They argue that the 33 countries have an obligation to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, ban the export of fossil fuels, offset their emissions resulting from the importation of goods, and limit the rejection of programs to address climate change abroad. On November 13, 2020, the ECHR accepted the complaint and asked the parties to address the following questions: (1) Do the applicants fall within the jurisdiction of the respondent states given their Paris Agreement commitments; (2) If so, can the applicants be regarded as actual or potential victims due to the GHG emissions emanating from the 33 countries? and (3) If the answer to (2) is yes, has there been a violation of Articles 2, 3, 8, and 14 of the Convention? 


On February 11, 2021, Our Children’s Trust filed a petition seeking permission to intervene in the case to provide the court with the best available science necessary to restore the climate system as well as information about why the countries should be held accountable for extraterritorial GHG emissions. While the ECHR denied Our Children’s Trust’s request to intervene in the case, Our Children’s Trust is working to support other intervenors to present the court with evidence of the most accurate scientific standards necessary to secure a safe climate.

ARMANDO FERRÃO CARVALHO, ET AL. V.
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

On May 24, 2018, inspired by the Juliana plaintiffs, ten families (including children) from Portugal, Germany, France, Italy, Romania, Kenya, and Fiji, along with a Swedish Sami Youth Association called “Sáminuorra” filed a legal action seeking an injunction to order the European Union to enact more stringent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions targets through its existing programs. The plaintiffs allege that the European Union’s existing target to reduce domestic GHG emissions is insufficient to avoid dangerous climate change and that it therefore threatens plaintiffs’ fundamental rights to life, health, occupation, and property. On May 15, 2019, the European General Court dismissed the case for lack of standing. The plaintiffs appealed that decision to the European Court of Justice and on March 25, 2021, the European Court of Justice upheld the lower court’s decision to dismiss the case. 

This case is similar to Juliana v. United States in that it alleges governmental violations of young people’s fundamental rights, but it is different from Juliana in that it contests the European Union’s GHG emissions reduction targets rather than governmental actions and inactions that cause climate change.

DUARTE AGOSTINHO, ET AL. V. PORTUGAL, ET AL.