 Friends of the Earth: ‘Government Policy’, Relevant Considerations and Human RightsStevie Martin Journal of Environmental Law, 2021, vol. 33, issue 2, 449-454 Abstract: Litigation involving climate change is on the increase both domestically and internationally and the Supreme Court's judgment in Friends of the Earth Ltd joins that list. While it was not as directly concerned with the implications of climate change as, perhaps, recent case law from the Netherlands or Australia, the case has significant implications including in terms of future litigation involving human rights challenges based on climate change. Three aspects of the judgment in particular warrant consideration. First, the legitimacy of the Court's purposive interpretation of the meaning of ‘Government policy’. Second, the Supreme Court left unanswered the question of whether the Paris Agreement was so ‘obviously material’ to the exercise of the relevant discretion that a failure to have regard to it would be Wednesbury unreasonable. Finally, the Supreme Court rejected the claim that designating the Airports National Policy Statement would interfere with any rights contained in the European Convention of Human Rights. This case analysis examines each of these aspects of the judgment. Keywords: Administrative law; climate change; human rights; policy; relevancy (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:envlaw:v:33:y:2021:i:2:p:449-454. Access Statistics for this article Journal of Environmental Law is currently edited by Sanja Bogojević More articles in Journal of Environmental Law from Oxford University Press |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.