On October 17, 2024, Ontario’s Court of Appeal sided with a group of young climate activists in its Mathur v Ontario decision, reviving a case against the province which was previously dismissed in April 2023.
On October 9, 2024, the Canadian government announced that it will establish a “Made-in-Canada” sustainable investing taxonomy, and institute mandatory climate disclosure requirements for large, federally-incorporated private companies.
The legislation’s goal is to support workers and communities by creating high-quality, socially-responsible (and preferably unionized) jobs, as part of the transition away from fossil fuels.
The European Court of Human Rights delivered its long-awaited first ruling in the climate action case Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz v. Switzerland, finding that the European Convention on Human Rights encompasses the right to effective protection from adverse effects of climate change.
Ontario’s recent omnibus Bill 229, ostensibly directed at addressing the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic consequences, contains provisions which effectively strip Ontario conservation authorities of certain permitting powers, redirecting them to the Ministry of Natural Resources and other public bodies.
The lawsuit alleges Ontario’s provincial government, under the leadership of Progressive Conservative Premier Doug Ford, violated the s. 7 (life, liberty and security of the person) and s. 15 (equal protection) Charter rights of the plaintiffs and future generations when it cancelled Ontario’s cap and trade program and adopted a new, less-ambitious climate plan as compared with the previous government’s.
As part of the settlement, the fund will “ensure that investment managers take active steps to consider, measure and manage financial risks posed by climate change and other relevant ESG risks…[and disclose] to members...those risks, as well as the systems, policies and procedures...to address those risks.” The fund will also commit to achieving a net zero carbon footprint by 2050.
On September 18th, New Jersey’s Democratic Governor Phil Murphy signed a “first-of-its-kind” environmental justice law that establishes permitting requirements for facilities looking to operate in the state’s “overburdened communities”. The law seeks to protect low-income and minority communities from disproportionate exposure to environmental harm.
The case La Rose et. al. v. Her Majesty the Queen was filed last October by several young Canadian plaintiffs, with support from Oregon-based non-profit law firm Our Children’s Trust. The lawsuit alleges the Canadian government violated the plaintiffs’ rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by failing to take meaningful action to prevent anthropogenic climate change.
On September 21st, 2020, the Canadian federal government accepted Ontario’s Emission Performance Standard (EPS) program as an alternative to the federal output-based pricing system (OBPS) that’s been in effect in the province since January 1st, 2019. Both programs are cap and trade-type emission pricing regimes designed to incentivize industrial polluters (e.g., pulp and paper facilities, base metal smelting facilities, etc.) to lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Justice Ginsburg’s death has reduced the liberal-leaning (and pro-climate) justices on the nine-member court to a minority of three. If a third Trump nominee is approved by the Senate (and this remains an open question), a conservative majority of six justices will be capable of radically stripping back the administrative state’s regulatory power over matters such as greenhouse gas emissions, health care, and labour law.
As the court wrote in its decision, “[a] government or political party can, in the words of Ontario’s Minister of Energy, “stick it to” another tier of government or political party as a matter of free speech in an election campaign…But a government cannot legislate a requirement that private retailers post a Sticker designed to accomplish that task. The mandatory fuel pump Sticker is an unconstitutional attempt to do just that.”
On July 31st, Ireland’s Supreme Court held that the Irish government’s current climate plan failed to meet the requirements set out in the statutory Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act of 2015. The ruling will require the government to (a) revise its plan to realise greater near-term emission reductions, and (b) better specify how Ireland will achieve the Act’s long-term objective of net zero carbon emissions by 2050.
