Download pdf
Tort-based Lawsuit: A Temporary Tactic but Not the Future of Climate Change Litigation
- 1 Renmin University of China
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
In recent years, the world has witnessed an increasing number of climate change lawsuits. Individuals and organizations are now employing lawsuits as a tactic to push forward climate change legislation. However, the traditional model of tort-based lawsuit turns out to have an unfavorable outcome for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are faced with difficulties in different steps of legal reasoning including civil wrong, tortious act and causation. Besides, even if the plaintiffs win the lawsuit, enforcement of civil courts is limited. The defendants can only be sentenced compensation and finish their responsibility by paying a certain amount of money instead of taking methods to save the climate. In fact, the case-by-case nature of tort-based lawsuit makes it ineffective to slow down climate change. Plaintiffs, often individuals or non-profit organizations are faced with disparity in legal resources with the defendants, often giant enterprises. With the difficulties, more and more plaintiffs now turn their eyes on right-based lawsuit to save the climate. Ultimately, litigation is only a temporary tactic to fill the gap before the existence of laws about climate change. Governments should speed up the process of legislation, and introduce strong administrative supervision to climate change, to save the climate.
Keywords
climate change litigation, tort-based lawsuit, ineffectiveness, administrative supervision
[1]. Omuko, L. A. (2016). Applying the Precautionary Principle to Address the “Proof Problem” in Climate Change Litigation. Tilburg Law Review, 21(1), 52-71.
[2]. Setzer, J., & Higham, C. (2023). Global trends in climate change litigation: 2023 snapshot. London School of Economics and Political Science, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and Environment. Retrieved from https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/global - trends - in - climate - change - litigation - 2023 - snapshot/
[3]. Peel, J., & Osofsky, H. M. (2018). A Rights Turn in Climate Change Litigation? Transnational Environmental Law, 7(1), 37–67.
[4]. Hsu, S. (2007). A Realistic Evaluation of Climate Change Litigation Through the Lens of a Hypothetical Lawsuit. University of Colorado Law Review, 79, 701-766.
[5]. Conservation Law Foundation, Inc. v. Shell Oil Co., 3:21CV00933(SALM) (D. Conn. Sep 16, 2022
[6]. Friends of Nature v. State Grid Gansu Electric Power Company, (2019) Gan 95 Min Chu No. 7
[7]. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. BP P.L.C., No. 19-1644 (4th Cir. 2022)
[8]. Juliana v. United States, 947 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 2020).
[9]. Civil Procedure Law, Article 58, 2021.
[10]. Administrative Procedure Law, Article 25, 2017.
[11]. Qian, J., & Chen, S. Q. (2024). An Argument on the Judicial Method of “Shuangtan” Target: From the Aspect of Procuratorial Public Interest Lawsuits. Legal Research, 1. Retrieved September 6, 2024, from https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/5ujoh_148DcLUiHo9OCxLw
[12]. Zhang Z. M. (2022). The Chinese Paradigm of Climate Change Litigation-Also on the Relationship between it and the System on Compensation for Eco-environmental Damage (Chinese). Politics and Law (07), 34-47.
[13]. People’s Procuratorates of Deqing v. Deqing Minghe Insulation co., ltd., (2020) Zhe 05 Minchu No. 115
[14]. Zhang M. C.. (2022). The Climate Public-interest Lawsuit Mechanism to Push Forward “Shuangtan” Target (Chinese). Journal of Zhengzhou University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) (06), 29-32, 124.
[15]. Juridical Interpretation targeting civil environmental public interest lawsuits. Fashi [2020] No. 20
[16]. Urgenda v. the State of the Netherlands. 19/00135 (Engels), Hoge Raad
[17]. Shao Y. J.. (2023). A Research into the Causation of American Climate Change Litigation (Chinese) (Degree Thesis, Shanghai Normal University). Master
[18]. New York v. The American Electric Power Company, Inc., et al. 10 Civ. 0817, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
[19]. Connecticut v. AEP, 564 U.S. 410 (2011)
[20]. Stadler, A. (2023). Can Civil Courts Save the Climate? Strategic Climate-Change Litigation before Civil Courts. Juridica International, 32, 3–12.
[21]. Conservation Law Foundation 2023 Impact Report. Retrieved Sept. 6, 2024, from https://www.clf.org/wp- content/uploads/2024/04/CLF_CM_Spring-2024_ImpactReport.pdf
[22]. Shell Oil Co. 2023 Consolidated Statement of Income. Retrieved Sept. 6, 2024, from https://reports.shell.com/annual-report/2023/consolidated-financial-statements/statement-of-income.html
[23]. Delaware v. BP America Inc., N20C-09-097 MMJ CCL
[24]. Ganguly, G., Setzer, J., & Heyvaert, V. (2018). If at First You Don’t Succeed: Suing Corporations for Climate Change. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 38(Issue 4), 841–868.
[25]. Zhu M. Z. (2022). Human Rights Approach to Climate Change Litigation and lts Limits (Chinese). Chinese Journal of Human Rights (03), 2-20.
[26]. https://climatecasechart.com/, Retrieved Aug 1st.
[27]. Sun, X. Y. (2023). On the Expansion and Realization of the Right to Environmental Information in Environmental Protection Supervision. Human Rights, (2), 38 - 61.
[28]. Jacqueline Peel & Rebekkah Markey - Towler. (2021). Recipe for Success?: Lessons for Strategic Climate Litigation from the Sharma, Neubauer and Shell Cases. 22 German Law Journal, No. 8, 1484 - 1498.
[29]. Ben Batros, & Tessa Khan. (2020). Thinking Strategically About Climate Litigation. SSRN Electronic Journal.
[30]. Yang X. (2023). Argumentation of Human Rights in Climate Change Law suits. Human Rights (02), 18-37.
[31]. Sharkey, C.M. (2023). Common Law Tort as a Transitional Regulatory Regime: A New Perspective on Climate Change Litigation. In: Adler, J.H. (eds) Climate Liberalism. Palgrave Studies in Classical Liberalism. (pp. 103-127) Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
[32]. Xie, H. F. (2022). The Establishment and Obstacles of Tort Liability Resulting from Climate Change. Politics and Law, (7), 2 - 17.
[33]. Gao, L. H., & Su, D. (2023). On Shift in the Relationship between Judicial and Executive Power: A Perspective on Climate Litigation in the United States of America. Journal of Nanjing Tech. University (Social Science Edition), (5), 36 - 50, 117.
[34]. Huang P. (2016). The Development and Comment on American Tort-based Climate Change Lawsuits-With a Perspective on the Current Judicial Situation. Journal of Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, 31(6), 7.
[35]. Hiromasa Minami (2009), Administrative Law. Tokyo: Yuhikaku
Cite this article
Wu,Y. (2024). Tort-based Lawsuit: A Temporary Tactic but Not the Future of Climate Change Litigation. Advances in Social Behavior Research,13,1-10.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Journal：Advances in Social Behavior Research
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).