• Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Non-US
  • Non-U.S. Litigation
  • U.S. Litigation
  • Home
  • U.S. Litigation
  • Non-U.S. Litigation
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Non-US
  • About
  • Contact

Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and 32 Other States

Filing Date: 2020
Reporter Info: 39371/20
Status: Pending
Case Categories:
  • Suits against governments
    • Human Rights
Jurisdictions:
  • European Court of Human Rights
Principal Laws:
  • European Convention on Human Rights
Summary:

On September 2, 2020, six Portuguese youth filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights against 33 countries. The complaint alleges that the respondents have violated human rights by failing to take sufficient action on climate change, and seeks an order requiring them to take more ambitious action.

The complaint relies on Articles 2, 8, and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protect the right to life, right to privacy, and right to not experience discrimination. The complainants claim that their right to life is threatened by the effects of climate change in Portugal such as forest fires; that their right to privacy includes their physical and mental wellbeing, which is threatened by heatwaves that force them to spend more time indoors; and that as young people, they stand to experience the worst effects of climate change.

The case is brought against the Member States of the EU (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Croatia, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden) as well as Norway, Russia, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. The complainants allege that the respondents have fallen short of their human rights obligations by failing to agree to emissions reductions that will keep temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as envisioned by the Paris Agreement.

On November 30, 2020, The European Court of Human Rights fast-tracked and communicated the case to 33 defendant countries, requiring them to respond by the end of February 2021. According to the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN), who are supporting the case, only a tiny minority of cases before the Court are fast-tracked and communicated.

On February 4, 2021, the Court rejected a motion by the defendant governments asking the Court to overturn its fast-tracking decision. The governments had asked the court to overturn priority treatment of the case and to hear arguments only on the admissibility of the case. The Court sent a letter to the parties rejecting these motions and gave the defendants until May 27, 2021 to submit a defense on both admissibility and the merits of the case.

At Issue: Youth filed human rights complaint against 33 governments.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Summary
09/02/2020 Complaint Download No summary available.
11/30/2020 Not Available Download Court communication of case to defendant countries (in French)
11/30/2020 Not Available Download Unofficial English translation of Court communication
02/04/2021 Decision Download Rejecting a motion by the defendants asking the Court to overturn its fast-tracking decision (in French)
04/29/2021 Not Available Download Amicus Brief by All Youth and Tampere University
05/04/2021 Not Available Download Amicus Brief by UN Special Rapporteurs
05/05/2021 Not Available Download Intervention by Save the Children
05/05/2021 Not Available Download Amicus Brief by the European Commissioner for Human Rights
05/06/2021 Not Available Download Amicus Brief by Amnesty International and others
05/06/2021 Not Available Download Amicus Brief by CIEL, Greenpeace, and Union of Concerned Scientists
05/06/2021 Not Available Download Amicus Brief by Climate Action Network Europe
05/06/2021 Not Available Download Amicus Brief by ESCR-Net and others

© 2021 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law · U.S. Litigation Chart made in collaboration with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

These materials are intended to be a useful resource and may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. They are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.

This website uses cookies as well as similar tools and technologies to understand visitors' experiences. By continuing to use this website, you consent to Columbia University's usage of cookies and similar technologies, in accordance with the Columbia University Website Cookie Notice.OkColumbia University Website Cookie Notice