Legal challenge to EU emissions targets
GLAN and Climate Action Network-Europe take EU to court over inadequate climate targets
GLAN and CAN-Europe have taken legal action against the European Commission before the EU courts, challenging the inadequacy of EU emissions targets set for Member States. EU 2030 emissions targets would result in 3°C of global heating by 2100 if all countries made the same level of effort – precisely the catastrophic level of global heating we are on course for.
This case stands to be the first in which the EU courts scrutinise the adequacy of the EU’s climate targets.
Current status: The case began with a ‘Request for Internal Review’ made by GLAN and CAN-Europe in August 2023 of the ‘Annual Emissions Allocations’ (AEAs) set by the European Commission for individual Member States. The AEAs relate to emissions covered by the EU Effort-Sharing Regulation i.e. from road transport, buildings, agriculture, waste and small industries.
The Commission rejected this request and so, in February 2024, we took it to court. The EU General Court granted our request to have the case prioritised on the grounds of the urgency of the climate crisis. The Commission is seeking to have the case dismissed on narrow technical grounds, without engaging with the substance of our arguments that its 2030 emissions targets are hopelessly inadequate. We expect a hearing in the first half of 2025. Read more about the case on the CAN Europe blog.
NEWS
Case documents
“The European Court of Human Rights made clear in April that States are obliged to adopt science-based emissions targets consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C. We have outlined how the EU’s 2030 targets were not derived from best available climate science, a point which the Commission has not even contested in its defence of our case. Instead, it has tried to have the case struck out on mere technicalities”
- Gerry Liston, Senior Lawyer with GLAN.
TIMELINE
23 August 2023 – GLAN and CAN-Europe submit Request for Internal Review (RIR) of EU Annual Emissions Allocations
14 December 2023 – European Commission replies rejecting request (RIR) as unfounded.
27 February 2024 – GLAN and CAN-Europe filed case against European Commission with EU Court.
8 July 2024 – European Commission submits its defence.
21 August 2024 – GLAN and CAN-Europe submit reply to European Commission’s defence.
26 September 2024 – European Commission’s ‘rejoinder’ to GLAN and CAN-Europe’s reply due.
First half of 2025 (estimate) – hearing before the EU General Court in Luxembourg.
Case Partner: Climate Action Network-Europe
Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe is Europe’s leading NGO coalition fighting dangerous climate change. They are a unique network, in which environmental and development organisations work together to issue joint lobby campaigns and maximise their impact. With over 200 member organisations active in 40 European countries, representing over 1,700 NGOs and more than 40 million citizens, CAN Europe promotes sustainable climate, energy and development policies throughout Europe.
"We have to use all available channels to push the European Commission to bring the EU’s climate ambition on track with its fair share for the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement. The EU has to ramp up emissions reduction and achieve at least a 65% cut by 2030 if it wants to be a credible actor. The recent acceleration in expanding renewable energies in many countries and related cost reductions provide new momentum for this” - Sven Harmeling, Head of Climate at CAN Europe.
Background
This case is brought against the European Commission under the EU Aarhus Regulation which allows NGOs to request an EU institution to conduct an ‘Internal Review’ of a measure on the grounds that it contravenes EU environmental law. Only ‘administrative acts’ can be the subject of such a request, meaning measures set down in EU legislation are excluded. The AEAs challenged in this case are contained in an administrative act, but the underlying targets on which they are based, including the EU’s overall target to reduce emissions by 55% (below 1990 levels) by 2030, are set out in legislation.
For this reason, the Commission claims that our request is in reality directed at targets set out in legislation and therefore inadmissible. GLAN and CAN-Europe argue, on the other hand, that the request is focused on the AEAs but acknowledge that the same flaws that apply to the AEAs apply equally to the underlying targets on which they are based.
We argue that these 2030 targets breach EU environmental law because:
-
They are not based on any proper scientific assessment of the emissions reductions required globally or by the EU itself to limit global heating to 1.5°C;
-
The EU explicitly refused to assess whether it is feasible for it to achieve greater emissions reductions than what its targets envisage;
-
The targets are totally inadequate as they are consistent with a catastrophic 3°C by 2100 if all countries make the same level of effort.
Formally, the case has become a challenge to the response of the Commission to our request for an Internal Review of the AEAs. However, we argue that the EU General Court must address our arguments about why the EU’s targets are inadequate to determine the validity of the Commission’s response. If successful, therefore, it will require the EU and its Member States to significantly increase the ambition of their emissions targets to comply with EU environmental law.