A new legal baseline
The Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in July 2025 was a turning point. For the first time, the Court declared that states have obligations to protect the climate arising from climate treaties, international law and human rights. The 1.5°C target was recognised as a minimum legal standard - and courts around the world are now using the opinion to enforce it domestically.
Drawing on this authoritative guidance, in 2026, a Dutch court ruled that the Netherlands had failed to protect the inhabitants of Bonaire - a small Caribbean island under Dutch jurisdiction - from the consequences of climate change. A non-binding international opinion proved influential for a binding domestic judgment, guiding what states are legally required to do.
This is what the new era of climate law looks like. Are you ready for it?
Accountability at every level
In 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in the KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland case that climate inaction can violate citizens' fundamental rights - and that governments at every level can be held to account for it.
The same logic is now reaching the private sector. Dutch courts have ruled that Shell has a legal duty to cut emissions. Indonesian islanders are suing Swiss cement firm Holcim over flood damage due to sea level rise. A Peruvian farmer sued carbon major RWE in Germany over glacial flood risk in the Andes.
The question used to be whether climate change is real and caused by humans; now it has become who is liable to pay for the damage.
Navigating the new landscape
This two-day course gives you a practical, up-to-date understanding of that landscape - from international foundations to European regulation - so you can navigate it with confidence. The course is designed for practitioners across sectors and requires no legal background.
