VEREIN KLIMASENIORINNEN SCHWEIZ AND OTHERS v SWITZERLAND - 53600/20 (Art 34 - Victim - Locus standi - Separate key criteria set out for establishing victim status of individual applicants and locus standi (representation) of associations in climate-change context : Grand Chamber) [2024] ECHR 304 (09 April 2024)

VEREIN KLIMASENIORINNEN SCHWEIZ AND OTHERS v SWITZERLAND - 53600/20 (Art 34 - Victim - Locus standi - Separate key criteria set out for establishing victim status of individual applicants and locus standi (representation) of associations in climate-change context : Grand Chamber) [2024] ECHR 304 (09 April 2024)

Individual applicants did not meet the high threshold for victim status in the climate change context, as their rights were not affected with sufficient intensity. The applicant association, representing a group particularly affected by climate change, fulfilled the criteria for locus standi and could act on behalf of its members. Switzerland failed its positive obligations under Article 8 ECHR by not implementing sufficient measures to combat climate change, including failing to establish a carbon budget or effective regulatory framework. The margin of appreciation was exceeded. There was also a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR as domestic courts failed to engage seriously with the...

Citation
[2024] ECHR 304
Parties
Applicant Association: Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz; Applicant (individual): Ruth Schaub; Applicant (individual): Marie-Eve Volkoff Peschon; Applicant (individual): Bruna Giovanna Olimpia Molinari; Applicant (individual): Marie Gabrielle Thérèse Budry; Respondent: Swiss Confederation
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
09 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 34 ECHR (human Rights Complaint) / Grand Chamber Judgment
Outcome
Partly in favour of applicant association; individual applicants' claims inadmissible; violations found against Switzerland.
Legal Topics
Climate Change, Standing (locus Standi), Right to Private and Family Life, Access to Court, Positive Obligations, Collective Action, Intergenerational Equity
Human Rights Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Climate Change Standing (locus Standi) Right to Private and Family Life Access to Court Positive Obligations +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz

Applicant Association

Ruth Schaub

Applicant (individual)

Marie-Eve Volkoff Peschon

Applicant (individual)

Bruna Giovanna Olimpia Molinari

Applicant (individual)

Marie Gabrielle Thérèse Budry

Applicant (individual)

Swiss Confederation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 34 ECHR (human Rights Complaint) / Grand Chamber Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether individual applicants and/or association have victim status/locus standi under Article 34 ECHR in climate change context
  2. 2 Whether Switzerland failed its positive obligations under Article 8 ECHR to protect against climate change impacts
  3. 3 Whether there was a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR (access to court) regarding climate litigation

Ratio Decidendi

Individual applicants did not meet the high threshold for victim status in the climate change context, as their rights were not affected with sufficient intensity. The applicant association, representing a group particularly affected by climate change, fulfilled the criteria for locus standi and could act on behalf of its members. Switzerland failed its positive obligations under Article 8 ECHR by not implementing sufficient measures to combat climate change, including failing to establish a carbon budget or effective regulatory framework. The margin of appreciation was exceeded. There was also a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR as domestic courts failed to engage seriously with the...

Court Disposition

Partly in favour of applicant association; individual applicants' claims inadmissible; violations found against Switzerland.

Orders

  • Respondent State to assess specific measures to be taken with the assistance of the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 ECHR.