The Case Between Urgenda and the State of the Netherlands

  • Otto Spijkers*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)
358 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands held that the Netherlands’ Government must ensure that, by the end of 2020, greenhouse gas emission levels from the Netherlands are at least a quarter below 1990 levels, otherwise the rights to life and wellbeing, as guaranteed under Articles 2 and 8 ECHR respectively, of the people in the Netherlands are breached. In doing so, the Supreme Court affirmed the reasoning and ruling of the Appeals Court, and distanced itself from the reasoning of the District Court, which was primarily based on domestic tort law.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)192-206
Number of pages15
JournalHungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was supported by the EU Seventh Framework Program (223062). The Division of Pharmacoepidemiology & Clinical Pharmacology has received unrestricted funding from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW), the Dutch Health Care Insurance Board (CVZ), the Royal Dutch Pharmacists Association (KNMP), the private/public-funded Top Institute Pharma ( www.tipharma.nl ; includes cofunding from universities, government, and industry), the EU Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI), the EU Seventh Framework Program (FP7), and the Dutch Ministry of Health and Industry (including GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and others).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Eleven, Boom uitgevers Den Haag. All rights reserved.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Case Between Urgenda and the State of the Netherlands'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this