Thread by @SabinCenter

The @IPCC_CH #ClimateReport is out today. Courts around the world have cited to IPCC reports to find that nations and corporations must reduce emissions and otherwise take #climateaction.

In Urgenda, the Dutch Supreme Court wrote, “When giving substance to the positive obligations imposed on the State...one must take into account broadly supported scientific insights . . . Important in this respect are...the reports from the IPCC.” bit.ly/3lKVeba

Also in the Netherlands, in its decision ordering Shell to reduce its emissions 45% by 2030, the Hague District wrote, “The global effects of climate change are apparent from the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” bit.ly/3vkDgyd

In Germany, the Fed Constitutional Court struck down parts of country’s climate law as insufficient. In reaching this, the court found “These [IPCC] reports are considered to be reliable summaries of the current state of knowledge on climate change.” bit.ly/32XrH3z

A decision in France recognizing damage from the gov’s inaction on climate cited to the IPCC: “[C]limate change, its anthropogenic nature, and its adverse consequences have been known for several decades and have been established by the IPCC since 1990.” bit.ly/3lILDBK

The Lahore High Court in Pakistan granted claims against the government for failing to implement its climate policies, writing, “According to IPCC (2007), the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events . . . are expected to increase in future.” bit.ly/3s3ohaW

In the Sharma case in Australia, the court wrote “the IPCC is the leading international body for assessing scientific research on climate change and is acknowledged by governments around the world as the most reliable source of advice on climate change.” bit.ly/3iwzJsw

Plaintiffs in a landmark case in Colombia, where the Supreme Court ordered the government to take action to prevent deforestation, cited IPCC evidence of the irreversible ecosystem damages from climate change. bit.ly/3yMZSt7

In a Brazilian case seeking disclosure of the climate impacts, plaintiffs cited “evidence confirmed by [the IPCC] that human activities (or anthropogenic) are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse effect gases.” bit.ly/3iAil6u

In the US, in Mass v. EPA, the Supreme Court cited the IPCC’s conclusion that “emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of . . . greenhouse gases.” bit.ly/3jD5GPj

Curious about how the U.S. and countries around the world are using the latest #climatescience to make their case? Check out our #climatelitigation databases: climatecasechart.com/climate-change…

Our #climateattribution database is a repository of scientific information relevant to #climatelitigation and policy-making. The newly released @IPCC_CH #ClimateReport is the latest resource featured in the database: climateattribution.org/resources/clim…

The @IPCC_CH #ClimateReport makes clear we must act boldly to drastically cut GHG emissions. Lawyers have a large role to play. Join our Model Laws for Deep Decabonization project to help draft model laws: lpdd.org #deepdecarb