Introduction

Climate change presents unprecedented challenges. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are the dominant driver of global warming. Climate litigation has emerged to advance accountability. Historically, more than 70% of climate cases worldwide have targeted governments (Page 13). Cases also seek to attribute liability for climate-related harm, known as polluter-pays cases, alongside failure to adapt cases involving corporations.

Methodology

The study focuses on strategic climate litigation, defined as lawsuits aiming to influence public debate or the behaviour of specific actors. It relies primarily on data hosted on the Climate Litigation Databases of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, supplemented by the Grantham Research Institute’s Global Trends in Climate Litigation reports, covering developments until the end of August 2025.

Part 1 – Overview Of Climate Litigation In Europe

Climate litigation in Europe has intensified. Since 2002, domestic climate lawsuits have been recorded in 26 European countries, alongside 12 applications before the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) and roughly 70 matters before the Court of Justice of the European Union (Page 7). Cases cluster in a few jurisdictions – United Kingdom (134), Germany (68), France (33) and Switzerland (22) – but activity is spreading south and east; by contrast, 21 Council of Europe member states have no recorded climate cases (Page 7). Strategic systemic cases and rights-based cases are proliferating. Engaging with these claims helps policymakers anticipate pressure points, reduce costly disputes, and improve legal certainty.

Part 2 – Climate Litigation Against States In Europe

Governments are the most common defendants. Since 2015, at least 120 such cases have been filed worldwide, more than half of which are in Europe (Page 26). Litigation tests states’ international obligations, regional human rights duties, and compliance with framework laws. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) confirmed that states must apply due diligence to climate mitigation. The European Court of Human Rights established that human rights protections require states to take regulatory action on mitigation and adaptation. Litigants also seek to hold governments accountable to domestic framework laws.

Part 3 – Climate Litigation Against Corporations In Europe

Corporations are increasingly targeted. In 2014 research was published attributing over 60% of global emissions to just 90 “Carbon Majors” (Page 38). Claimants use corporate framework litigation and climate-related human rights due diligence to compel companies to adopt Paris-aligned strategies. Polluter-pays litigation seeks damages for emissions or enforces decommissioning obligations. Furthermore, failure to adapt cases challenge corporations for neglecting to build resilience to specific physical climate risks.

Part 4 – Enforcement Of Damages

Enforcing compensation in corporate climate litigation faces significant challenges. Climate-related damages involve vast, long-term impacts. Even when liability is established, insolvency, asset shielding, and insurance caps can leave victims undercompensated. Emerging statutory models aim to operationalise the polluter-pays principle, but face legal headwinds. Policymakers are exploring public-private burden-sharing mechanisms.

Conclusion

Climate litigation is a significant European phenomenon used by civil society, individuals, and corporations. While court decisions clarify legal norms, litigation is piecemeal and costly. Policymakers must engage with climate cases and shape norms through legislation. States should introduce regulatory frameworks of sufficient ambition to ensure compliance with human rights and international law, which may include curtailing support for the fossil fuel industry.