|
McGaughey And Davies V Universities Superannuation Scheme Ltd
''McGaughey and Davies v Universities Superannuation Scheme Ltd and Directors'' 023EWCA Civ 873is a UK company law, climate litigation, and pension law case, seeking permission for a derivative claim to enforce duties of the directors of the UK university pension fund, USS Ltd. The case was first to sue for directors of a major UK corporation to divest fossil fuels, and is the first case of beneficiaries of a pension corporation bringing a derivative claim for breaches of directors' statutory duties. The High Court accepted that the claimants had standing to bring a derivative claim, but refused permission based on the rule in ''Foss v Harbottle''. The claimants secured permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal with a hearing in June 2023, but were unsuccessful, as Asplin LJ held that the appropriate procedure was a "beneficiary derivative claim" where directors' duties may be held on trust. The fossil fuel risk claim was not addressed in substance but "well suited" for being br ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Climate Litigation
Climate change litigation, also known as climate litigation, is an emerging body of environmental law using legal practice to set case law precedent to further climate change mitigation efforts from public institutions, such as governments and companies. In the face of slow politics of climate change, climate change politics delaying climate change mitigation, Climate activism, activists and lawyers have increased efforts to use national and international judiciary systems to advance the effort. Climate litigation typically engages in one of five types of legal claims: Constitutional law (focused on breaches of constitutional rights by the state), administrative law (challenging the merits of administrative decision making), private law (challenging corporations or other organizations for negligence, nuisance, etc., Consumer protection, fraud or consumer protection (challenging companies for misrepresenting information about climate impacts), or human rights (claiming that failure t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Human Rights Act 1998
The Human Rights Act 1998 (c. 42) is an Act of Parliament (United Kingdom), Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which received royal assent on 9 November 1998, and came into force on 2 October 2000. Its aim was to incorporate into UK law the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights. The Act makes a remedy for breach of a Convention right available in UK courts, without the need to go to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg. In particular, the Act makes it unlawful for any public body to act in a way which is incompatible with the convention, unless the wording of any other primary legislation provides no other choice. It also requires the judiciary (including tribunals) to take account of any decisions, judgment or opinion of the European Court of Human Rights, and to interpret legislation, as far as possible, in a way which is compatible with Convention rights. However, if it is not possible to interpret an Act of Parliament so as to mak ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Climate Change Litigation
Climate change litigation, also known as climate litigation, is an emerging body of environmental law using legal practice to set case law precedent to further climate change mitigation efforts from public institutions, such as governments and companies. In the face of slow climate change politics delaying climate change mitigation, activists and lawyers have increased efforts to use national and international judiciary systems to advance the effort. Climate litigation typically engages in one of five types of legal claims: Constitutional law (focused on breaches of constitutional rights by the state), administrative law (challenging the merits of administrative decision making), private law (challenging corporations or other organizations for negligence, nuisance, etc., fraud or consumer protection (challenging companies for misrepresenting information about climate impacts), or human rights (claiming that failure to act on climate change is a failure to protect human rights). L ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Milieudefensie V Royal Dutch Shell
''Milieudefensie v Royal Dutch Shell'' (2021) is a human rights law and tort law case heard by the district court of The Hague in the Netherlands in 2021 related to efforts by several NGO's to curtail carbon dioxide emissions by multinational corporations. It was brought by the Dutch branch of Friends of the Earth and a group of other NGO's against the oil corporation, Shell plc. In May 2021, the court ordered Shell to reduce its global carbon emissions from its 2019 levels by 45% by 2030, relating not only to the emissions from its operations, but also those from the products it sells. However, on 12 November 2024, The Hague's appeals court dismissed the 2021 ruling that had required Shell to cut its emissions, determining that there was no "societal standard of care" to enforce specific emissions reductions on Shell. Facts Following the global adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, which aimed to limit the rise in the global average temperature to under 1.5 °C through v ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Smith V Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd
''Smith v Fonterra Co-Operative Group Ltd'' is a landmark New Zealand tort law case, concerning liability of major fossil fuel polluters for climate damage. The NZ Supreme Court held that polluting companies could be liable in tort to pay damages from global warming and rising sea levels to people whose coastal property is damaged, overturning courts below. Facts Mike Smith (activist), Michael John Smith stated that he was of Ngāpuhi and Ngāti Kahu descent, and was the climate change spokesman for the National Iwi Chairs Forum, Iwi Chairs’ Forum. He claimed customary interests in lands and other resources situated in or around Mahinepua in Northland Region, and argued that various sites of customary, cultural, historical, nutritional and spiritual significance to him are close to the coast, on low-lying land or are in the sea. Smith brought suit against several defendants that operate facilities that emit greenhouse gas emissions, including dairy farms, a power station, and an ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Neubauer V Germany
''Neubauer v Germany'' (also the ''Klimaschutz'' case) was a landmark German constitutional law case, concerning the duty of the German federal government to take action to prevent climate damage. In this court case, which was decided on 24 March 2021, a group of activists sued over the vagueness present in the 2019's Climate Protection Act. The German Constitutional Court declared the Federal Climate Protection Act partly unconstitutional because it did not sufficiently protect young people against future infringements and limitations of their existing fundamental rights because of climate change. Text was copied from this source, which is available under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License/ref> Facts Activists backed by Fridays For Future, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and other NGOs brought a claim that the lack of a comprehensive legal framework to reduce carbon emissions by 2030 violated their fundamental rights as enshrined in German basic law. T ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Urgenda V State Of Netherlands
''Urgenda Foundation'' v ''State of the Netherlands'' (2019) (in Dutch: Klimaatzaak Urgenda ) is climate change litigation heard by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands related to government efforts to curtail carbon dioxide emissions. The case was brought against the Dutch government in 2013, arguing the government, by not meeting a minimum carbon dioxide emission-reduction goal established by scientists to avert harmful climate change, was endangering the human rights of Dutch citizens as set by national and European Union laws. The initial ruling in 2015, requiring the government to meet an emissions goal of 25% reduction from 1990 levels by 2020, was upheld through the Supreme Court on appeals, affirming that reduction in emissions was necessary for the Dutch government to protect human rights. It is the first such tort case taken against a government challenging climate change aspects based on a human rights foundation, and the first such successful climate justice case. Bac ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Lliuya V RWE AG
''Lliuya v RWE AG'' (2015) Case No. 2 O 285/15 (Essen Oberlandesgericht) was a German tort law and climate litigation case started by , concerning liability for climate damage in Peru from a melting glacier, against Germany's largest coal burning power company, RWE, which has caused approximately 0.47% of all historic greenhouse gas emissions. If successful, it would have establish legal precedent that companies contributing to climate change are liable for damages they cause. It was appealed in the Higher Regional Court in Hamm, North Rhine-Westphalia. On 28 May 2025, the court rejected Lucino's lawsuit. Facts , a Peruvian farmer from Huaraz, population 120,000, claimed against RWE, Germany's largest electric company, that it knowingly contributed to climate damage by emitting greenhouse gases, and was partly responsible for melting mountain glaciers near his town. This caused Palcacocha, a nearby glacial lake, to increase in size since 1975, creating a major flood risk to the t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ince & Co
Ince & Co was a United Kingdom-based holding company with a core business in legal services, which was listed on the London Stock Exchange. The company also offered complementary services in accounting, financial services, consulting, and pensions advice. It was previously known as Ince Gordon Dadds LLP, following the acquisition of Ince & Co by Gordon Dadds Group LLP, and rebranded as The Ince Group in August 2019. In 2022, The Ince Group ranked 47th in ''The Lawyer'' UK 200 list, with £100.2 million in revenue during the previous year. As of 2021, the firm operated in 9 countries and had 21 offices, and employed over 700 employees worldwide, including support staff. The chief executive officer was Donald Brown, while the non-executive chairman was Simon Howard. In May 2023, Axiom DWFM purchased the firm out of administration and reverted its name to Axiom Ince. Axiom Ince then acquired Plexus Law from administration on 7th July 2023. In August 2023, the SRA suspended three d ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Climate Risk
Climate risk is the potential for problems for societies or ecosystems from the impacts of climate change.IPCC, 2022Annex II: Glossary öller, V., R. van Diemen, J.B.R. Matthews, C. Méndez, S. Semenov, J.S. Fuglestvedt, A. Reisinger (eds.) InClimate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change .-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2897–2930, The assessment of climate risk is based on formal analysis of the consequences, likelihoods and responses to these impacts. Societal constraints can also shape adaptation options. There are different values and preferences around risk, resulting in differences of risk perception.Ara Begum, R., R. Lempert, E. Ali, T.A. Benjaminsen, T. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Lewison LJ
Sir Kim Martin Jordan Lewison, PC (born 1 May 1952), styled The Rt Hon. Lord Justice Lewison, is a Lord Justice of Appeal. He is a graduate of Downing College, Cambridge, where he is an honorary Fellow. Early life and education Lewison was born on 1 May 1952 to Anthony Frederick Lewison and Dinora Lewison (née Pines). He was educated at St Paul's School, an all-boys private school in London. He studied at Downing College, Cambridge. Legal career Lewison was called to the bar (Lincoln's Inn) in 1975 and has been a Bencher since 2003. He became a Queen's Counsel in 1991. He was appointed an Assistant Recorder in 1994 and a Recorder in 1997. In 2000, he was appointed a Deputy High Court Judge. He was appointed to the High Court of Justice on 29 April 2003 and assigned to the Chancery Division, receiving the customary knighthood. The following year, he was appointed to the Competition Appeal Tribunal. Lewison served as Chancery Supervising Judge from 2007 to 2009. On 3 Octobe ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
