Britain could soon be in the firing line for international climate lawsuits after a major legal opinion from the UN’s top court cleared the way for countries to be held accountable over their environmental records.
In a landmark ruling, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) said that failure to meet climate commitments could, in certain cases, allow states affected by climate change to sue others. The opinion also opened the door to claims over historical emissions – leaving the UK, the cradle of the industrial revolution, potentially exposed reports The Telegraph.
While the advisory opinion is not legally binding, it carries significant legal and moral weight. Experts believe it could shape the direction of global environmental litigation for years to come.
Britain has previously acted on an ICJ advisory opinion. Last year it agreed to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius following a decision by the court – a deal in which Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, played a key role.
The latest opinion has sparked fears among critics that Lord Hermer might support any future attempt by foreign governments to sue Britain.
“Hermer has demonstrated he does not bat for Britain,” said Richard Tice, deputy leader of Reform UK.
Both Reform and the Conservatives rejected the court’s ruling outright and said that, if in government, they would refuse to pay any climate-related damages.
Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, said: “The ICJ has lost its core purpose and is now joining political campaigns and bandwagons based upon ideological obsessions on issues such as reparations and destroying the sovereign rights of national governments.
“The Labour Government is equally ideologically obsessed with this nonsense. Activist-led court rulings like this should never be treated as binding.
“This is the process of lawfare that led to the Chagos surrender and must not be replicated on this issue. We challenge Labour to put Britain’s interest first and make clear they do not intend to act on this ridiculous advisory ruling.”
Mr Tice added: “Under no circumstances would a Reform government pay any ludicrous climate reparations. Nor will we be beholden to any foreign court.
“This is another non-binding advisory judgment by the ICJ, who absurdly said we should give up the Chagos. They just hate us.”
The case was brought forward by a group of Pacific island law students and ultimately gained support from 132 nations. The ruling itself stretched to 133 pages and took two hours to deliver.
It was warmly received by environmental campaigners and communities on islands threatened by rising seas and soaring temperatures.
Vanuatu, the island nation seen as one of the most vulnerable to climate change, welcomed the decision. Its minister of climate change adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, said the country would now bring the opinion to the UN General Assembly and push for a resolution to enforce it.
He said: “The Global South is bearing the brunt of a crisis it did not create. Families are losing their homes, entire cultures are at risk of disappearing, and lives are being shattered by man-made climate disasters.
“The nations most responsible for emissions should be held accountable for any violations of legal obligations and they must also step up and lead in providing resources and support to aid those most affected.”
Legal experts described the ruling as a significant victory for small and low-lying states. Many of these nations have long called for clarity over state responsibilities in climate action, after years of frustration over the lack of progress.