Menu Expand

Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE

Style

Stoll, P. Hardly About People and Climate: Court of Justice of the European Union’s People’s Climate Case – Exemplifying Luhmanns’ Ecological Communication. German Yearbook of International Law, 65(1), 143-158. https://doi.org/10.3790/gyil.2023.310258
Stoll, Peter-Tobias "Hardly About People and Climate: Court of Justice of the European Union’s People’s Climate Case – Exemplifying Luhmanns’ Ecological Communication" German Yearbook of International Law 65.1, 2024, 143-158. https://doi.org/10.3790/gyil.2023.310258
Stoll, Peter-Tobias (2024): Hardly About People and Climate: Court of Justice of the European Union’s People’s Climate Case – Exemplifying Luhmanns’ Ecological Communication, in: German Yearbook of International Law, vol. 65, iss. 1, 143-158, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/gyil.2023.310258

Format

Hardly About People and Climate: Court of Justice of the European Union’s People’s Climate Case – Exemplifying Luhmanns’ Ecological Communication

Stoll, Peter-Tobias

German Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 65 (2022), Iss. 1 : pp. 143–158

Additional Information

Article Details

Pricing

Stoll, Peter-Tobias

Abstract

Abstract: In 2018, a number of individuals and an indigenous youth organisation challenged the European Union’s main pieces of climate change legislation for lack of ambition in the European Courts, the case was soon labelled as ‘The People’s Climate Case’ in public discourse. The carefully drafted application was dismissed by the General Court and in appeal by the European Court of Justice for lack of standing on the basis of the long-standing Plaumann formula. That formula requires applicants to show that they are affected by the legal act in question in a singular manner. The courts neither saw such a singularity, nor did they engage in a more generous interpretation of Article 263‍(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The decision might conflict with the European Union’s obligations under the Aarhus convention and raise concerns in view of the rights to an effective remedy under Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Last but not least, it raises questions as to the appropriate means for protection of fundamental rights in the European Union and the need for a constitutional challenge procedure. Altogether, labelling such a case as the ‘People’s climate case’ might be seen ironic given that the applicants did everything they could to show that they were individually and singularly affected and because the courts did not address the issue of climate change in substance.

Table of Contents

Section Title Page Action Price
Peter-Tobias Stoll\nHardly About People and Climate: Court of Justice of the European Union’s People’s Climate Case – Exemplifying Luhmanns’ Ecological Communication 143
I. Introduction 143
II. A Well-Designed Climate Case – The Facts 147
A. The Reasoning of the Courts 148
1. Article 263‍(4) TFEU and Plaumann 148
2. No Individual Concern Under Plaumann 149
3. No More Flexible Interpretations of the ‘Individual Concern’ 150
4. An Effective Remedy Under Article 47 of Charter? 151
5. Aarhus Convention 152
B. Cavalho et al. in context 154
1. The ‘constitutional’ Approach of the German Bundesverfassungsgericht 154
2. Cases Before the European Court of Human Rights 154
III. What next? 155