Litigating Climate Change
Why the ICJ’s Climate Change Advisory Opinion matters and how the UK should respond
July 7, 2026
This report warns that Britain could be liable for climate change “reparations” running into the trillions of pounds, after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion that countries have binding legal duties to prevent climate harm – duties going well beyond the Paris Agreement on Climate Change – and can be sued for compensation if they fail.
The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion asserts that the UK is subject to many further climate change obligations – obligations which the UK has never accepted and should firmly reject. Despite this, the UK chose to vote to endorse the advisory opinion at the UN General Assembly this May, directly against our own national interests.
With Forewords by Rt Hon Lord Burnett of Maldon KG, Rt Hon Lord Sumption OBE, Hon Alexander Downer AC, Rt Hon Sir Malcolm Rifkind KCMG KC and Lord Verdirame KC, the report, written by three leading legal academics, warns the ruling could also be used by activist litigants to:
- Block new North Sea oil and gas licences — the Court explicitly found that granting fossil fuel licences, or even failing to shut down existing production, “may constitute an internationally wrongful act”.
- Open the floodgates to compensation claims against Britain specifically for being the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution.
- Trigger a wave of lawsuits in international courts and tribunals against the UK, modelled on the Chagos Islands case — where the Government controversially proposed to surrender sovereign territory to Mauritius after a non-binding ICJ opinion was wrongly treated as though it were legally binding.
The launch of this report was covered by:
Related Publications
Authors

Yuan Yi Zhu
Senior Fellow, Policy Exchange

Richard Ekins KC (Hon)
Head of the Judicial Power Project



