Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database
Litigation

Associação Último Recurso et al. v. Portuguese State

Date
2023
Geography

About this case

Documents

Filing Date
Type
Document
Summary
09/19/2024
Decision
Supreme Court's decision (Portuguese)
04/11/2024
Decision
Decision of 1st Instance (Portuguese)
04/11/2024
Decision
Decision of 1st Instance (English)
11/26/2023
Petition
Petition

Summary

On November 26, 2023, three NGOs (Associação Último Recurso, Quercus and Sciaena) filed a complaint against the Portuguese State, pursuant to the Portuguese Class Action Statute (i.e., Law no. 83/95, of August 31, 1995). They invoke that the Portuguese State adopted in 2021 a Climate Framework Law (i.e., Law no. 98/2021, of 31 December 2021), according to which the Portuguese State, until February 1, 2023, had an obligation to adopt several measures (including to enact laws and other political acts) aimed at achieving the GHG emissions reduction goal of 55% until 2030, in comparison with the emissions values of 2005. These measures include the adoption of the carbon budgets for 2023/2025 and 2025/2030; a report of assessment of climate impact of the legislation in force; the regulation of the climate risk and impact of financial products; an amendment to the rules in relation to corporate governance; an amendment to the legal regime on the exploration for, and exploitation of, hydrocarbons. Moreover, the plaintiffs claim that other deadlines until the end of 2023 and early 2024 are likely to be failed. Accordingly, the plaintiffs ask the court (1) to declare that the Portuguese State has not complied with its obligations pursuant to the Portuguese Climate Framework Law, which realizes the human and fundamental rights listed in the Constitution and in the ECHR, and implements the Portuguese NDC submitted under the Paris Agreement; and (2) to require the State to adopt the laws and political acts necessary to comply with the Climate Framework Law. On April 11, 2024, the court of first instance dismissed the proceedings. The plaintiffs appealed. Considering that the case was dismissed on lack of clarity of the request, the Supreme Court of Justice accepted the applicant's appeal and ordered the applicant to reframe its request, within a deadline of 10 days, and to submit a more concrete and specified request.