Claimants’ Standing in Climate Disputes: Rules of Proceedings and “Political” Decisions

Climate activists encounter at least four procedural considerations when they choose to initiate legal action in any court: legal standing, forum choice, burden of proof, and separation of power theory, that is to say the limits of a Court order with regard to the legislative and executive powers. In this study, we will focus particularly on the first of these aspects, namely the claimants’ legal standing in climate change litigation and its legal basis. Indeed, if procedural rules are sometimes of help, providing ad hoc standing for this kind of litigation, the fact remains that judges are still often required to manage such claims without a specific rule. In said instances, judges are compelled to modify conventional standing regulations to align them with the unique characteristics of climate change litigation. Otherwise, the absence of legal standing is frequently the primary argument used to dismiss the lawsuit, providing judges with a strategic response to a strategic claim.