Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Climate science constitutes an essential evidentiary basis for judges' decision-making in climate change litigation.It has assisted courts in identifying victims, determining guard rails for states' legal obligations to mitigate and adapt to climate change, and prescribing remedies when states have failed to meet their legal obligations 1.States' duties to prevent climate change impacts are also hotly debated in human rights courts ('HRCs').These novel legal claims give rise to particular challenges as HRCs must interpret (uncontested) scientific evidence and, more demandingly, 'referee a "battle of the experts"' 2 when presented with competing scientific claims.This task may require adapted fact-finding strategies 2-4, for which the approaches of domestic and other international courts could provide inspiration.
Schuldt et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: