Climate change litigation and business accountability for Human Rights: A comparative analysis of Tort and Constitutional Law Approaches

Introduction

Climate litigation is emerging as a site for contesting and promoting environmental justice and sustainable development. With regards to increasing business accountability in respect to climate change, applicants world-wide are largely turning to torts-based claims and human rights claims anchored on constitutions and international human rights instruments. Tort law has provided avenues for addressing environmental harms through established legal doctrines such as negligence, nuisance, and trespass, allowing individuals and communities to seek redress for damages caused by pollution and other environmental infringements. Simultaneously, constitutional law, particularly provisions that guarantee the right to a healthy environment, is assuming an increasingly significant role in environmental and climate litigation, providing a basis for challenging inadequate environmental policies and actions. Landmark cases such as Urgenda 

The Netherlands, where tort law principles were interpreted in light of human rights obligations to hold the state accountable for insufficient climate action, and Held 

Montana, where a constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment was successfully invoked against state policies promoting fossil fuels, illustrate the potential