De klimaatzaak

Ook in Australië, waar de regering Abbott bepaald niet milieuvriendelijk opereert, wordt met belangstelling naar de uitkomsten in de rechtszaak tussen Urgenda en de Nederlandse staat gekeken. Hoewel het rechtssysteem op een aantal belangrijke punten afwijkt denkt Katherine Lake, Research Associate bij het Centre for Resources, Energy and Environmental Law van de Universiteit van Melbourne, dat de uitspraak nieuwe aanknopingspunten biedt.

ELDERS - The Netherlands has much broader laws than Australia around “standing”, which determines which people or groups have the right to sue over a particular issue. The Dutch standing laws explicitly recognise the right of environmental groups to bring an action to protect “the general rights of other persons”.

(…)

There has also been a reluctance by the Australian courts to find a causal nexus between climate change and the greenhouse gas emissions of individuals and organisations. The view that the role of the common law is to protect private rights and cannot be invoked to protect public rights or the environment has held sway.

Having said that, in Australia there have been no climate change actions based solely on tort to date, and therefore the laws have not been tested. If a group satisfies the standing test, then it may be able to meet the requirements of a tort action, in particular to prove a sufficient causal link between Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions and the harm caused to its people (present and future).