This webinar explored the legal implications of the historic Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell case, wherein a Dutch court found that Shell has a duty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

According to an Australian court, the government has a duty to take reasonable care not to harm children and young people in approving fossil fuel projects. The implications of this case – Sharma v. Minister for the Environment were examined in this webinar.

Though fossil fuels have rightfully been the target of sustained climate legal action, not enough attention has been paid to another major driver of climate change: animal agriculture. This webinar explores the overlap between animal agriculture and climate change and its implications for cases.

EACOP, if built, would be the world’s largest heated crude oil pipeline. Given the climate, human rights, and environmental harms that the pipeline would generate, litigators brought a case challenging it to the East African Court. This webinar examined the scientific and legal aspects of the case.

This webinar explored the psychological impacts of climate change, particularly on youth, and what these impacts mean for climate litigation and human rights law, including legal avenues that may be open to climate litigators as a result of new research on climate anxiety.

This webinar explores the Sustaining the Wild Coast v. Shell case, which succeeded in temporarily blocking Shell from conducting seismic surveys off the South African Wild Coast.