Judicial Interpretation of Tort Law in<i>Milieudefensie</i>v.<i>Shell</i>: A Rejoinder

Mayer, Benoît

doi:10.1017/s2047102522000279

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…44 Thus, Burgers' analysis concludes that this 'landmark' ruling 45 struck an appropriate balance between responding to the disruptive phenomenon of climate change and maintaining coherence of legal reasoning with existing legal doctrines and frameworks, particularly in the context of Dutch tort law. 35 In 'Judicial Interpretation of Tort Law in Milieudefensie v. Shell: A Rejoinder', 46 Mayer clarifies that his disagreement with Burgers concerns the method that a judge should use to determine the content of the corporate duty of care to mitigate climate change. The dialogue between Mayer and Burgers exemplifies the evolution of legal doctrines in response to climate change, as well as the contested nature of this legal disruption.…”

Section:  mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal, Regulatory, and Governance Innovation in Transnational Environmental Law

Etty¹,

Zeben²,

Carlarne³

et al. 2022

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section:  mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal, Regulatory, and Governance Innovation in Transnational Environmental Law

Etty¹,

Zeben²,

Carlarne³

et al. 2022

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Towards a Non-Use Regime on Solar Geoengineering: Lessons from International Law and Governance

Gupta,

Biermann,

van Driel

et al. 2024

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, some scientists have called for research into and potential development of ‘solar geoengineering’ technologies as an option to counter global warming. Solar geoengineering refers to a set of speculative techniques to reflect some incoming sunlight back into space, for example, by continuously spraying reflective sulphur aerosols into the stratosphere over several generations. Because of the significant ecological, social, and political risks posed by such technologies, many scholars and civil society organizations have urged governments to take action to prohibit the development and deployment of solar geoengineering techniques. In this article we take such calls for a prohibitory or a non-use regime on solar geoengineering as a starting point to examine existing international law and governance precedents that could guide the development of such a regime. The precedents we examine include international prohibitory and restrictive regimes that impose bans or restrictions on chemical weapons, biological weapons, weather modification technologies, anti-personnel landmines, substances that deplete the ozone layer, trade in hazardous wastes, deep seabed mining, and mining in Antarctica. We also assess emerging norms and soft law in anticipatory governance of novel technologies, such as human cloning and gene editing. While there is no blueprint for a solar geoengineering non-use regime in international law, our analysis points to numerous specific elements on which governments could draw to constrain or impose an outright prohibition on the development of technologies for solar geoengineering, should they opt to do so.

show abstract

Transforming the Rule of Law in Environmental and Climate Litigation: Prohibiting the Arbitrary Treatment of Future Generations

Sulyok

2024

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article maps the shared legal anatomy of climate and environmental lawsuits, in which plaintiffs claim protection for future generations before domestic or international courts. By closely analyzing the litigation strategies of plaintiffs and the inquiry of courts, the article argues that these proceedings revolve around structurally similar legal standards across domestic and international jurisdictions, which correspond to five normative requirements flowing from the rule of law: namely, respect for human rights, certain quality of law requirements, prohibition of arbitrary exercise of governmental powers, non-discrimination, and access to justice. The cross-jurisdictional analysis shows that courts appear to be increasingly willing to protect future generations against arbitrary treatment by present-day decision makers. The article appraises whether such an intergenerationally sensitive reinterpretation of the rule of law could help to change the short-termist paradigm of environmental and climate law.

show abstract

Judicial Interpretation of Tort Law inMilieudefensiev.Shell: A Rejoinder

Cited by 3 publications

References 2 publications

Legal, Regulatory, and Governance Innovation in Transnational Environmental Law

Legal, Regulatory, and Governance Innovation in Transnational Environmental Law

Towards a Non-Use Regime on Solar Geoengineering: Lessons from International Law and Governance

Transforming the Rule of Law in Environmental and Climate Litigation: Prohibiting the Arbitrary Treatment of Future Generations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About