Climate change litigation against fossil fuel companies: a contextual analysis
化石燃料企業に対する気候変動訴訟：文脈的分析 (AI 翻訳)
Tim Van Vooren, Joyeeta Gupta
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、化石燃料企業に対する173件の私的気候訴訟（PCL）を分析し、使用される主張の分類や地域ごとの成功率の差異を明らかにした。パリ協定以降、訴訟件数は増加傾向にあり、企業の不正行為や民事責任が多く主張されている。欧州では原告側の勝利事例が多く、米国では相対的に成功率が低い。国内法（仏デューディリジェンス法、クイーンズランド州人権法）の存在が原告の主張を支える事例も確認された。
English
This paper analyzes 173 private climate litigation (PCL) cases against fossil fuel companies, categorizing arguments into nine clusters and examining geographic trends. Since the Paris Agreement, cases have steadily increased, with corporate misconduct and civil liability being the most common arguments. European courts have seen more plaintiff wins, while U.S. cases are less successful and face counter-litigation. National laws like France's Duty of Vigilance Law and Queensland's Human Rights Act support plaintiffs' claims.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本では気候訴訟がまだ限定的であるが、本論文はグローバルな訴訟リスクの全体像を提供し、日本企業が海外で直面する可能性のある法的課題（特に欧州や米国での訴訟）を理解する上で有益である。また、国内の気候関連法整備の参考にもなる。
In the global GX context
This paper provides a comprehensive global overview of climate litigation against fossil fuel companies, which is increasingly relevant to transition risk disclosure under TCFD/ISSB. It highlights how legal frameworks in different jurisdictions affect corporate accountability, offering insights for multinational companies assessing regulatory and reputational risks.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:This paper offers a systematic taxonomy and geographic comparison of climate litigation, valuable for legal and transition risk scholars.
🏢実務担当者:Corporate legal and sustainability teams can use this to assess litigation risk across jurisdictions and inform disclosure strategies.
🏛政策担当者:Regulators can draw lessons on how national laws (e.g., duty of vigilance) strengthen climate litigation and consider similar frameworks.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract Over 70% of all historical CO 2 emissions are attributable to the 78 largest fossil fuel corporations and state-owned entities; however, only 5.7% of all climate court cases have been filed against these very companies. While scholars have analysed individual court cases and some have provided an overview of different cases, there is a lack of information on trends in private climate litigation (PCL) against fossil fuel companies across different geographies in terms of arguments used and success rates. Hence, this paper asks: How do spatio-contextual factors in private climate litigation against fossil fuel corporations contribute to leaving fossil fuels underground? Using a mixed-methods research approach (systematic literature review, interviews, a case study of cases against fossil fuel companies, and mapping), we conclude that: (i) the arguments used in the 173 PCL cases can be clustered into 9 categories; (ii) yearly PCL cases have seen steady growth after the 2015 Paris Agreement; (iii) corporate misconduct/deception has been cited most often as an argument, followed by civil liability, specific non-compliance with treaties and national legislation, breach of procedural norms, and human rights. (We also see an increasing number of cases where shareholders (mostly in the U.S.) are filing cases against investors, arguing that investing in fossil fuel is a breach of fiduciary duty); (iv) although most cases are filed in the U.S., the percentage of cases against fossil fuel companies there is the lowest; (v) Europe has seen the most influential wins – in national courts, but also at the International Court of Justice located in the Hague. U.S. cases have been relatively less successful for plaintiffs and face counter-litigation; (vi) The presence of national laws, such as the Duty of Vigilance Law in France and the Queensland Human Rights Act of 2017 helps plaintiffs to support their arguments. In showing how court cases are developing across different jurisdictions we are hoping to enhance understanding of the role of the courts in implementing the Climate Change Treaty regime.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-026-09729-wfirst seen 2026-07-16 05:05:49
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。