人权与气候变化网络:荷兰国家诉紧急议程基金会案,荷兰最高法院,2019年12月20日(19/00135)

Q2 Social Sciences
O. Pedersen
{"title":"人权与气候变化网络:荷兰国家诉紧急议程基金会案,荷兰最高法院,2019年12月20日(19/00135)","authors":"O. Pedersen","doi":"10.1177/1461452920953655","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Climate change litigators are increasingly relying on a range of different jurisdictional avenues and legal regimes. The recent Urgenda decision by the Dutch Supreme Court provides a surprisingly rare snapshot of the relevance of human rights law to climate change litigation. Focusing on the Supreme Court's reliance on the environmental rights case law from the ECHR, this case note argues that climate change and human rights adjudications takes the form of an adjudicatory network. This network creates spaces for domestic courts to develop contingent responses to emerging climate change claims.","PeriodicalId":52213,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"227 - 234"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The networks of human rights and climate change: The State of the Netherlands v Stichting Urgenda, Supreme Court of the Netherlands, 20 December 2019 (19/00135)\",\"authors\":\"O. Pedersen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1461452920953655\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Climate change litigators are increasingly relying on a range of different jurisdictional avenues and legal regimes. The recent Urgenda decision by the Dutch Supreme Court provides a surprisingly rare snapshot of the relevance of human rights law to climate change litigation. Focusing on the Supreme Court's reliance on the environmental rights case law from the ECHR, this case note argues that climate change and human rights adjudications takes the form of an adjudicatory network. This network creates spaces for domestic courts to develop contingent responses to emerging climate change claims.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Law Review\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"227 - 234\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452920953655\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452920953655","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

气候变化诉讼律师越来越依赖于一系列不同的司法途径和法律制度。荷兰最高法院最近对“紧急议程”的裁决提供了人权法与气候变化诉讼相关性的罕见快照。本案例说明以最高法院对欧洲人权法院环境权利判例法的依赖为重点,认为气候变化和人权裁决采用审判网络的形式。这一网络为国内法院制定应对新出现的气候变化索赔的应急措施创造了空间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The networks of human rights and climate change: The State of the Netherlands v Stichting Urgenda, Supreme Court of the Netherlands, 20 December 2019 (19/00135)
Climate change litigators are increasingly relying on a range of different jurisdictional avenues and legal regimes. The recent Urgenda decision by the Dutch Supreme Court provides a surprisingly rare snapshot of the relevance of human rights law to climate change litigation. Focusing on the Supreme Court's reliance on the environmental rights case law from the ECHR, this case note argues that climate change and human rights adjudications takes the form of an adjudicatory network. This network creates spaces for domestic courts to develop contingent responses to emerging climate change claims.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Law Review
Environmental Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信