{"title":"Between Paradox and Practical Reason: Access to Justice in\n KlimaSeniorinnen\n as Front Line of European Climate Litigation","authors":"Francesco Lucherini, Andrea Cerofolini","doi":"10.1017/s2047102526100442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Standing requirements before the European Court of Human Rights pose significant hurdles for plaintiffs in climate litigation, exposing deep tensions between judicial restraint and legal accountability, redress for vulnerable groups and discrete access to justice. In <jats:italic>KlimaSeniorinnen</jats:italic> , the Court advanced an evolutive interpretation of victim status and legal representation standards ‘in the light of conditions in contemporary society’, drawing extensively on the international legal framework through the principle of systemic integration. The key doctrinal takeaway is the articulation of justiciable minimum standards of due diligence for climate mitigation under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, situated at the intersection of nearly unattainable individual victimhood and a substantive evolution of <jats:italic>locus standi</jats:italic> for demonstrably affected vulnerable groups. Although the Court’s reasoning strains several doctrinal conundrums – particularly regarding the interplay between individual victim status and legal representation – it ultimately constitutes a principled increment of legal accountability, commensurate with the necessities brought forward by the prospect of climate collapse.","PeriodicalId":45716,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Environmental Law","volume":"42 1","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102526100442","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Standing requirements before the European Court of Human Rights pose significant hurdles for plaintiffs in climate litigation, exposing deep tensions between judicial restraint and legal accountability, redress for vulnerable groups and discrete access to justice. In KlimaSeniorinnen , the Court advanced an evolutive interpretation of victim status and legal representation standards ‘in the light of conditions in contemporary society’, drawing extensively on the international legal framework through the principle of systemic integration. The key doctrinal takeaway is the articulation of justiciable minimum standards of due diligence for climate mitigation under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, situated at the intersection of nearly unattainable individual victimhood and a substantive evolution of locus standi for demonstrably affected vulnerable groups. Although the Court’s reasoning strains several doctrinal conundrums – particularly regarding the interplay between individual victim status and legal representation – it ultimately constitutes a principled increment of legal accountability, commensurate with the necessities brought forward by the prospect of climate collapse.
欧洲人权法院(European Court of Human Rights)的长期要求对气候诉讼中的原告构成了重大障碍,暴露了司法约束与法律问责、弱势群体补救和离散的司法途径之间的深刻紧张关系。在klimaseniorinen案中,法院“根据当代社会条件”对受害者地位和法律代理标准提出了一种渐进的解释,通过系统整合原则广泛借鉴了国际法律框架。关键的理论结论是,根据《欧洲人权公约》第8条,在几乎无法实现的个人受害者身份和明显受影响的弱势群体的立场的实质性演变的交叉点上,阐明了减缓气候变化的可审理的最低尽职调查标准。虽然法院的推理解决了几个理论难题- -特别是关于个人受害者地位和法律代理之间的相互作用- -但它最终构成了法律责任的原则性增加,与气候崩溃前景所带来的必要性相称。