Climate Change: Do the courts get to decide?

This week, Shell appealed a court order to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 45% by 2023. The company argues that the judgment overstepped the judiciary's remit.

Why it matters: This important climate case highlights the role of courts in combating climate change. All-staff need to understand the legal implications and potential consequences for corporations.

The big picture: The case against Shell is part of a broader global effort to tackle climate change through legal action. It sets a precedent for holding corporations accountable for their emissions.

The bottom line: Shell's appeal raises questions about the responsibility of individual companies in reducing emissions and the potential for future legal disputes.

Meanwhile, a European Court of Human Rights (not to be confused with EU Court of Justice), decision, delivered earlier this week, appears to say that European countries that did not pass sufficiently robust climate change laws could be in breach of Europe’s human rights convention. This decision is controversial as the convention makes no mention of climate change. Expect significant political pushback on what many will see as judicial overreach.