Climate Change and the ECtHR
The Grand Chamber’s ruling in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland [2024] ECHR 304, handed down on Tuesday, seems to have caused a (predictable) storm – and though nothing to do with “religion” specifically, it’s potentially very important in the wider area of human rights law.
In brief, the applicants argued that the Swiss authorities had been insufficiently diligent in the area of climate‑change mitigation and that their demographic group – elderly females – was particularly vulnerable to climate-induced heatwaves; they relied on Articles 2, 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention. The Court decided by 16 votes to 1 that Article 8 was violated (respect for family and private life). Tim Eicke, the Judge for the UK, disagreed with his colleagues on the violation to Article 8 (respect for private and family life), but he did agree that Article 6 (right of a fair trial) had been violated.
Joshua Rozenberg, commenting on the verdict You can also see You can also find out more about the following: A Lawyer Writes The following are some examples of how to use
“… the ruling will now give further ammunition to those who think the UK should now leave the European Convention on Human Rights. The only British-born German judge who seems to have made this decision is the German-born British Judge.
