Sui giudizi di responsabilità civile intentati contro i c.d. global carbon majors: riflessioni internazionalprivatistiche a margine della climate change litigation

Translated title of the contribution: [Machine translation] On civil liability lawsuits brought against the so-called global carbon majors: international-privatistical reflections at, margine della climate change litigation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

[Machine translation] Taking Lliuya v. RWE as a starting point, the present contribution analyses\r\nthe climate change litigation from a private international law perspective. In particular, it investigates which law applies to tortious actions brought against large polluters, such as the Global Carbon Majors, in front of courts of EU Member States. Because of the material and temporal scope of application of the Rome II Regulation, it is argued that cases relating to damage to the environment and to damage to individuals caused by continuous emissions which started before 11 January 2009 fall outside the scope of application of the Regulation. For both cases residual role is vested upon national conflict of law rules, which national legislators should align to their goals to combat climate change.
Translated title of the contribution[Machine translation] On civil liability lawsuits brought against the so-called global carbon majors: international-privatistical reflections at, margine della climate change litigation
Original languageItalian
Pages (from-to)183-209
Number of pages27
JournalJUS
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2024

Keywords

  • Climate Change Litigation
  • Continuous Environmental Torts
  • Lliuya c. RWE
  • Lliuya v. RWE
  • Rome II Regulation
  • contenzioso climatico
  • illeciti ambientali continuativi
  • regolamento Roma II

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '[Machine translation] On civil liability lawsuits brought against the so-called global carbon majors: international-privatistical reflections at, margine della climate change litigation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this