Children and climate change: Australian court strikes down landmark ruling protecting minors

A landmark ruling stating that Australia's environment minister had a duty to protect children from climate change was overturned by an Australian court on Tuesday.

Environmental groups had hailed last year's legal victory by a group of high school students as a tool to fight fossil fuel projects.

A federal court ruled that Environment Minister Sussan Ley did not have to weigh the ill effects of climate change on children when assessing the approval of new fossil fuel projects.

Add WION as a Preferred Source

The decision overturned a July 2021 ruling by a lower court that said the minister had a duty to "avoid causing personal injury or death" to minors because of the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

While Minister Ley welcomed the verdict,Anjali Sharma, the 17-year-old student who brought the legal action in 2020 said she was "devastated" by the minister's successful appeal.

"Two years ago, Australia was on fire; today, it's underwater. Burning coal makes bushfires and floods more catastrophic and more deadly. Something needs to change," she said.

Whitehaven's Vickery coal mine, at the centre of the case, posed only a "tiny increase in risk" to the students, according to the federal court.

According to Macquarie University law professor George Newhouse, the Sharma decision reflects Australia's lack of a bill of rights.

We don't have the scope for the successful climate change litigation that we see in Europe because Australia has a constitution that, quite intentionally, contains no human rights," he said while speaking to AFP.

Newhouse said landmark cases such as the Urgenda precedent, in which Dutch citizens successfully sued their government for climate action, would also fail in Australia for the same reason.

"I am disappointed by the Sharma decision, but not surprised," he said.

Sharma and her fellow students will consider whether to appeal to the highest court in Australia.

Considering the importance of the issues raised, climate and environmental law expert Laura Schuijers from the University of Sydney says the High Court may well decide to hear the appeal.

Watch |You can help fight climate change with these six lifestyle changes

According to Schuijers, Australia's lack of constitutional protection for human rights makes it "a very interesting place for climate litigation."

"It means that litigants are seeking creative ways to test the bounds of the law and to ask the ultimate question: in the face of inaction, who is responsible for picking up the slack?" she said.

The ruling had "put the spotlight on Australia's politicians and policymakers to take the proactive action that the science presented in the courtroom suggests is urgently needed".

As global weather patterns change, Australia has experienced more droughts, deadly bushfires, bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef, and floods.

(With inputs from agencies)