Strategic Litigation and Climate Change: the Urgenda Case

Abstract Even if it may be challenging to provide one definition, strategic litigation can be defined as a legal action in a court that is consciously aimed at achieving changes in law, policy, practice and public awareness, above and beyond relief for the named plaintiff and the judicial outcome. This thesis delves on the growing phenomenon of strategic litigation, firstly examining its roots, from the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, as well as the abolitionist movements in the US or UK along with diverse forms of social activism. Thus, a strategic litigation can yield diverse outcomes, or impacts, divided in three main categories, such as material impacts, instrumental impacts and non-material impact, even if it is not easy to recognise them in a society that evolves in terms of policy, practice and mobilisation. On the other hand, it is worth underline that despite its positive effects, strategic litigation can be characterised by prolonged durations, high costs, potential alienation and the risk of negative and irreversible outcomes. Hence, in order to ensure effective strategic litigation, it could be useful to employ other tools and adopt a broader perspective, conceiving it as a process rather than merely an isolated legal case. In this particular instance, a relevant area of focus involves litigation related to climate change, which may result both in favourable judicial outcomes and indirect impacts for climate action. However, the implementation, the necessary time and financial resources are not always clearly defined. Nevertheless, in recent years, different categories of challenges against corporations and governments have seen an increase, especially brought by individuals and NGOs. Moreover, potential intergovernmental disputes as a future trend is expected, involving for instance the protection of the ocean. In this context, the Urgenda case represents a landmark case, in which it was recognised the State responsibilities regarding climate change, and which lead to relevant developments in government cases. Serving as an influential model, this case has inspired similar litigation worldwide and it has shaped the trajectory of subsequent climate litigation against