Date: 20 December 2019
Court: Supreme Court of the Netherlands
Citation(s): ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2007
Short summary
The Supreme Court of the Netherlands held that the Dutch State was obliged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by the end of 2020, compared to 1990 levels. This obligation stemmed from the Netherlands’ commitments under the European Convention on Human Rights, including Dutch citizens’ rights to life and respect for private and family life.
Summary by: Clarrisa Burki
Click here to open the case in PDF format
Weight of decision
The judgment was handed down by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, the highest judicial body within that nation. It is binding within the Netherlands and compels the government to act.
Key facts
The Urgenda Foundation (“Urgenda”), a Dutch environmental group, brought an action to require the Dutch government to take measures to combat climate change. Urgenda based their action on the right to life and the right to a healthy environment. The European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) requires the State to protect these rights for their residents. Article 2 guarantees the right to life and Article 8 ensures the right to respect for private and family life. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the ECHR places an obligation on a State to act and take the appropriate measures when there is a real and immediate risk to people’s lives or welfare and when the State is aware of this. This obligation equally applies when it comes to wide-reaching environmental risks threatening large groups or the population as a whole even if these threats will only materialise over the long term.
According to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), each country is responsible for its own share of emissions; each state is therefore obliged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in proportion to its share of the responsibility.
In this case, the State asserted that it is not for the courts to undertake the considerations required for a decision on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and that doing so would amount to an order to create legislation, violating the separation of powers.
Previous instances
In the District Court, Urgenda sought a court order to order the Netherlands to reduce its emission of greenhouse gasses such that, by the end of 2020, emissions would be reduced by 40% compared to 1990 levels. The District Court upheld the plaintiff’s claim in part and ordered the State to reduce emissions by at least 25% compared to 1990 by 2020.
The District Court’s order was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Continued on the next page…