Standing for Climate Change Litigation: A Tort Law Approach and the Way Forward

Climate change litigation is a polycentric issue, implying multiple parties at a wide scale. It is at odd with the rules of civil law, designed to individualise a connection between two parties, and shaped within a bilateral framework. Proximity between the parties is the hallmark of standing to examine the justiciability of a case. In climate change litigation, this bilateral scope is inherently problematic, and applying the rules of standing gives rise to recurrent legal contention. This difficulty has justified a theoretical analysis structured around a dialectical appreciation of standing, i.e., strictly versus broadly interpretated. Yet, the progression of admissible cases indicates a timely opportunity to enquire upon the contemporary relevance of this standpoint. This paper analyses, through a sample of exemplifying cases, the nature of the evolution of standing. It shows that it has not been allowed through a relaxing interpretation of the degree of proximity between the parties. It has rather been driven by the recognition of additional forms of proximity, recognised by the law, at both procedural and substantial levels. This paper seeks to move beyond the dialectical analysis, by clarifying the nature of these legal shifts. Keywords: Standing; Climate change litigation; Human rights; Civil liability; Proximity.