This article starts the task of expanding the concept of climate change litigation. It argues that a preoccupation with high-profile cases, can divert attention from other important issues litigated within the broader climate change context. The article highlights four key and interrelated considerations that would inform a future conception of climate change litigation.First, climate litigation occurs across scales, and smaller cases at lower levels of governance are as important as more high-profile cases, for myriad reasons. Second, climate change litigation can engage all elements of a good climate response, not just emissions abatement. Third, the extent of private law's potential contribution, tends to be overlooked. Fourth, ignoring 'invisible' climate change cases -or invisible issues within those cases -can result in perilous consequences for climate change policy. Illuminating the implications of all climate cases across scales is fundamental for coherent policy. In addition, this broader conception can support strategic choices. climate change litigation -climate change policy -mitigation -multilevel governanceprivate law

AbstractThis article examines the complex risks, costs and rewards of large-scale private law climate litigation – the climate litigation ‘holy grail’. It argues that while these cases undoubtedly have heroic aspects, their impacts can be complex or difficult to understand. It uses overlapping theories of metaphor and narrative in law, and theories of private law, to make some critical observations about these cases. Distilling some core reflections from the grail legends, the article argues that success in these cases requires a nuanced understanding of victory and defeat, and more careful thinking about the character, aims, and effect of these pieces of litigation. These stories inspire constant reflection as to what the metaphor of the ‘holy grail’ might mean in this context, and the role that these cases play in the development of a narrative about climate litigation.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper makes a case for the integration of compulsory climate change topics across the core law curriculum. It argues that the most persuasive rationale for this is based in climate legal obligations and institutions, and a clear-eyed perception of climate risk, rather than the sustainability agenda. To this end, the paper outlines efforts taken to ‘mainstream’ climate change and environmental law education in a core course of the LLB degree – land law. An empirical study sought to evaluate the students’ engagement with these materials, and their broader views concerning climate change and their legal education. The paper critically evaluates the course and the results of the empirical study. It concludes that students want to be, and should be, taught climate law and the climate context of law as part of their prescribed learning throughout the core curriculum, rather than as optional or elective content.