CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

TOMÁŠ BRUNER

CYIL 14 (2023)

Introduction 1 This article draws the reader’s attention to the first Czech climate litigation, during which the Czech courts interpreted the Paris Agreement 2 and other sources of international law. The litigation underwent two judicial instances. Firstly, the Municipal Court in Prague 3 dealt with the question whether the Czech government and four ministries set sufficient measures to mitigate climate change and to adapt to it. The Municipal Court found out that the mitigation measures of the four ministries were insufficient and ordered them to adopt adequate measures that would curb the GHG emissions of 55 % until the year 2030 in comparison to emission levels in 1990. In consequent appellate proceedings, the Czech Supreme Administrative Court 4 overturned this decision arguing that neither Czech nor international law provided sufficient legal basis for it. The article argues that the different opinions of both judicial instances represent a clash of two important values. This clash is going to reoccur in other cases, as climate litigations gain popularity. 5 Therefore, the first Czech climate litigation is likely to influence Czech courts’ attitude to future climate lawsuits, but it also provides guidance on how to interpret Article 4 (especially para 2 and 16 to 18) and 7 of the Paris Agreement. The article summarises the litigation and analyses whether and how its outcomes contribute to the development of international environmental law. 6 For this purpose, the article proceeds in three steps. The first chapter describes the initial first instance proceedings in front of the Municipal Court and cassation complaints against its results. The second chapter reviews the following second instance judgement of the Supreme Administrative Court. The third chapter argues that the case is relevant for the (Czech) practice as well as general development of international law in 5 points and links it to certain other cases and ongoing debates. 1 This article was written thanks to the support of the project UNCE/HUM/28 (Peace Research Center Prague). The author wishes to thank for very helpful comments and hints from the peer review of the article. 2 Conference of the Parties: Adoption of the Paris Agreement (adopted on 12 December 2015, in force 4 November 2016, for the Czech Republic 4 November 2017) 3156 UNTS 54113 (the Paris Agreement). In the Czech Republic promulgated as the Communication no. 64/2017 Sb. of Int. Treaties, Communication of the Foreign Affairs Ministry concerning the conclusion of the Paris Agreement, adopted in Paris on 12 December 2015. (the Paris Agreement). 3 The Judgement of the Municipal Court in Prague, 15 June 2022, no. 14A 101/2021 – 248, (the Judgement no. 14A 101/2021 – 248). 4 The Judgement of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, 20 February 2023, no. 9 As 116/2022 – 166, hereinafter as “the Judgement no. 9 As 116/2022 – 166”. 5 Suing a government, state, and public authorities for insufficient actions against climate change represents a frequent type of climate lawsuit together with the climate lawsuits against permissions of fossil fuels extraction. SETZER, J., VANHALA, L. C., Climate change litigation: A review of research on courts and litigants in climate governance, 10(3) Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change , 2019. PEEL, J., OSOFSKY, H. M., Climate change litigation , Cambridge University Press, 2015. BOUWER, K., The unsexy future of climate change litigation, 30(3) Journal of Environmental Law 2018. DWYER, G., “Market Substitution” in the Context of Climate Litigation, 12(1) Climate Law 2022, pp. 1–31. 6 The article focuses on the aspects relevant from the perspective of international law and does not cover the details relating to Czech domestic administrative and procedural law, which can be discussed elsewhere.

472