Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database
Litigation

KlimaSeniorinnen v Switzerland (ECtHR)

Date
2020
Geography
International

About this case

Documents

Filing Date
Type
Document
Summary
03/06/2025
Decision
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe decision on implementation
04/09/2024
Decision
Judgment from the European Court of Human Rights.
04/09/2024
Press Release
Press release from the ECtHR regarding the judgment.
12/05/2022
Other
Third-Party Intervention by Our Children’s Trust, Oxfam, the Centre for Climate Repair at Cambridge, and the Centre for Child Law at University of Pretoria
12/05/2022
Other
Third party intervention submitted by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law.
12/05/2022
Other
Third party intervention submitted by Germanwatch, Greenpeace Germany and Scientists for Future.
12/02/2022
Petition
Observations on the facts, admissibility and the merits by Klimaserioninnen.
04/26/2022
Decision
Relinquishment of jurisdiction in favor of the Grand Chamber.
04/01/2022
Other
Relinquishment summary.
10/13/2021
Reply
Reply made on October 13, 2021 by the Swiss Women Ass'n (Part 2 - Observations on the Facts)
10/13/2021
Reply
Reply made on October 13, 2021 by the Swiss Women Ass'n (Part 3 - Observations on the Law)
10/13/2021
Reply
Reply made on October 13, 2021 by the Swiss Women Ass'n (Part 4 - Request for Just Satisfaction/Request for General Measures)
10/13/2021
Reply
Reply made on October 13, 2021 by the Swiss Women Ass'n (Part 1 - Summary)
10/13/2021
Reply
Petitioner's reply.
09/22/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by Altsean-Burma, Comisión Colombiana de Juristas (CCJ), Comité Ambiental en Defensa de la Vida (CADV), The European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), FIAN International, The Global Initiative for Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (GIESCR), Human Rights Action (HRA), The international Human Rights Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law, Layla Hugues, Minority Rights International (MRG), Observatori DESC (ESCR observatory), The Oficina para América Latina de la Coalición Internacional para el Hábitat (HIC-AL), The Women’s Legal Centre (WLC)
09/22/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by ENNHRI – European Network of National Human Rights Institutions
09/22/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by S. Seneviratne and A. Fischlin of ETH Zürich
09/21/2021
Other
Third party intervention by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the Swiss Section of the ICJ
09/21/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by International Commission of Jurists
09/21/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
09/17/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by E. Brems of the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University
09/17/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by E. Schmid and V. Boillet of Université de Lausanne (english) (french version)
09/15/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by Global Justice Clinic, Climate Litigation Accelerator and C. Voigt
09/15/2021
Other
Third Party Intervention by UN Special Rapporteurs and UN independent expert – M. A. Orellana – D.R. Boyd – C. Mahler
07/16/2021
Reply
Swiss Government's reply on admissibility and merits
04/26/2021
Decision
Subject matter of the case and questions attached to the communication letter (in French)
03/25/2021
Decision
Court communication letter to the Swiss government (in English)
11/26/2020
Application
Application to the European Court of Human Rights

Summary

For a summary of the Swiss case, see here. After having exhausted all national remedies available, with the final decision from the Swiss Supreme Court communicated to the parties in May 2020, on November 26, 2020 an association of senior women (Senior Women for Climate Protection Switzerland) took the Swiss government to the European Court of Human Rights because their health is threatened by heat waves made worse by the climate crisis. They also requested the case to be treated under the expenditure procedure pursuant to Article 41 of the Rules of the Court. The application listed three main complaints: Switzerland's inadequate climate policies violate the women's right life and health under Articles 2 and 8 of the ECHR; the Swiss Federal Supreme Court's rejected their case on arbitrary grounds, in violation of the right to a fair trial under Article 6; and the Swiss authorities and courts did not deal with the content of their complaints, in violation of the right to an effective remedy in Article 13. The ECtHR preliminary accepted the case and communicated it to the Swiss government on March 25, 2021. The ECtHR gave the case priority status and called on Switzerland to submit a response by July 16, 2021, which was timely filed. On September 21, 2021, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the Swiss Section of the ICJ submitted a third-party intervention providing observations on the effects of climate change on the right to life and the right to respect for private and family life and for the home and the positive obligations of States resulting from these rights, in light of principles of international environmental law, among other issues. The European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHR) also submitted a third-party intervention. On October 13, 2021, the petitioner replied to the Swiss government's response to the ECtHR, arguing that the Swiss government failed to protect the Applicants' rights to life and private life under Arts. 2 and 8 ECHR, by failing to adopt the necessary legislative and administrative framework to do its share to prevent a global temperature increase of more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. On April 26, 2022, the Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights relinquished jurisdiction in favor of the Grand Chamber of the Court. The case is now going to be examined by the ECtHR's Grand Chamber of 17 judges on account of the fact that the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation of the Convention (Art 30 ECHR). On December 2, 2022, the applicants submitted a petition highlighting observations on the facts, admissibility and the merits. On December 5, 2022, several organizations, including the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, submitted third party interventions to the case. Hearings were held in March 2023. On April 9, 2024, the European Court found a violation of the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8) and access to court (Article 6 § 1). The Court found that Article 8 of the Convention encompasses a right to effective protection by the State authorities from the serious adverse effects of climate change on lives, health, well-being and quality of life. The Court found that Switzerland failed to comply with its positive obligations under the Convention concerning climate change, with critical gaps in establishing a relevant domestic regulatory framework, including through a carbon budget or national GHG emissions limitations. Switzerland had also failed to meet its past GHG emission reduction targets. While recognizing that national authorities enjoy wide discretion concerning the implementation of legislation and measures, the Court held that the Swiss authorities had not acted in time and in an appropriate way to devise, develop, and implement relevant legislation and measures in this case. In addition, the Court found that Article 6 § 1 of the Convention applied to the applicant association’s complaint concerning effective implementation of the mitigation measures under existing domestic law. On March 6, 2025, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe decided that Switzerland is not yet complying with the requirements of the ECtHR judgment in the case of the KlimaSeniorinnen. Switzerland has yet to prove that it is doing enough to align its policy with a maximum global warming limit of 1.5°C. Specifically, the CMDH "invited also the authorities to further demonstrate that the methodology used to devise, develop and implement the relevant legislative and administrative framework responds to the Convention requirements as detailed by the Court and relies on a quantification, through a carbon budget or otherwise, of national greenhouse gas emissions limitations"