To set the scene, Professor Eckes identified various substantive gaps in EU climate change law. At the same time, she acknowledged that it remains challenging to contest inadequate climate strategies and targets directly before EU courts. The Plaumann criteria for direct and individual concern in the context of actions for annulment are extremely stringent. Indirect challenges through preliminary rulings are equally problematic since national courts do not have an obligation to send requests for such rulings, and the CJEU can only deal with questions of law and not of fact. As a result, interested parties choose to litigate before domestic courts of Member States. Yet they also face numerous obstacles. Professor Eckes delved into the case studies of climate limitation before Czech, Spanish, Italian, and Belgian national courts. The talk also addressed some of the most recent developments in the field of climate change law, namely the ECtHR’s judgment in KlimaSeniorinnen.

If you are interested in the intersection of law and the globalised world, we invite you to join our upcoming seminars organised by the Globalisation & Law Network. Stay updated on our program and register here.