Overview

• The July 23 advisory opinion holds that states’ failure to regulate fossil fuel production, permits or subsidies can breach customary international law and trigger full reparations.
• Though non-binding, the decision offers a potent interpretive framework for legislators and courts to review existing and proposed fossil fuel activities.
• Lawyers anticipate citing the opinion in challenges to coal and gas permit approvals, investment disputes over mine expansions and contract negotiations with banks financing fossil projects.
• In monist systems such as France, Argentina and the Netherlands, judges can directly apply the ICJ’s reasoning, and past cases show constitutional benches in dualist states also reference advisory opinions in environmental rulings.
• Small island states may leverage the court’s findings to strengthen future claims for climate reparations from major emitters over sea-level rise and extreme weather damage.