Challenging Legal Standing in Climate Change Litigation. A Comparative Approach to the Italian Case ‘Giudizio Universale’

Associations and private individuals, groups of young people and groups of senior women, farmers and workers, present and future generations, mayors and whole towns, trees and woods, water and rivers: the list of claimants in climate change litigation is wide and varied. Indeed, since everyone and no one in particular has the right to a healthy climate, determining claimants’ legal standing in climate disputes is of paramount importance. Rules of proceedings are sometimes of help, providing ad hoc standing for public interest litigations. In other cases, however, judges have to manage the claim according to the traditional rules of proceedings, which generally require claimants to demonstrate their direct and personal concern. Thus, since legal standing is one of the first hurdles that activists must overcome to succeed in climate disputes, procedural law may provide judges with the grounds for meaningful decisions as well as a way to avoid ‘political’ decisions. In this paper, after analysing why civil litigation is proving to be the only suitable path for climate activists in the Italian legal order, I therefore intend to address four key ‘standing-orientated’ climate cases and namely the Dutch case of Urgenda, the Canadian case of ENvironnement JEUnesse, the Belgian case of Klimaatzaak, and the Swiss case of KlimaSeniorinnen. Having completed this analysis, and returning to the Italian case, the possible outcomes related to the claimants’ legal standing are then explored, both with respect to the associations and the individuals involved in the case.