French Climate Litigation

Climate Litigation in France

Climate litigation has emerged as a powerful instrument for compelling governmental climate action in France. French courts, particularly the administrative courts, have developed a distinctive approach to climate change cases, relying on the constitutional Charte de l’environnement (2005), the European Convention on Human Rights, and domestic legislation on carbon budgets and ecological debt. The rapid development of French climate case law since 2019 reflects a global trend of strategic litigation against State inaction on climate change.

L’Affaire du Siècle (2021)

The most widely known French climate case is L’Affaire du Siècle (Notre Affaire à Tous v. France), brought by four non-governmental organisations — Notre Affaire à Tous, Greenpeace France, Oxfam France, and Fondation pour la Nature et l’Homme — against the French State. The plaintiffs argued that the State’s failure to meet its own carbon emissions reduction targets constituted an ecological damage (préjudice écologique) and a breach of its obligations under the Charte de l’environnement, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the Paris Agreement.

The Tribunal Administratif de Paris (Paris Administrative Court), in its landmark judgment of 3 February 2021, held the French State liable for its failure to honour its climate commitments. The court found that the State had exceeded the carbon budgets set by the Stratégie Nationale Bas-Carbone (SNBC) for 2015–2018, and that this failure constituted a faute (fault) engaging the State’s liability. The court ordered the State to take all necessary measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. In its subsequent decision of 22 December 2022, the court ordered the State to pay symbolic damages of €1 to each NGO and to comply with its injunction by 31 December 2023.

The Paris Administrative Court’s judgment was historic: it was the first time a French court had held the State liable for climate inaction and ordered specific remedial measures. The case has inspired similar actions in other jurisdictions and has established the justiciability of the carbon budget framework.

Grande-Synthe (Conseil d’État, 2020/2021)

The Commune de Grande-Synthe case, brought by the municipality of Grande-Synthe (a coastal commune in northern France threatened by sea-level rise) and a group of NGOs, was the first climate case to reach the Conseil d’État. The applicants sought the annulment of the government’s implicit refusal to take additional measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the Paris Agreement objectives.

The Conseil d’État, in its judgment of 19 November 2020 (Commune de Grande-Synthe, No. 427301), ruled that the State was obliged to take action to limit climate change and that the government’s refusal to adopt additional measures could be challenged by recours pour excès de pouvoir. The court gave the government three months to demonstrate that the existing measures were sufficient to meet the national carbon budgets and the 2030 emissions reduction target. On 1 July 2021, the Conseil d’État found that the government’s explanations were insufficient and ordered it to take all necessary measures to achieve the 2030 emissions reduction targets.

The Grande-Synthe case established several important principles. First, it recognised that climate change creates a préjudice écologique affecting the community and future generations. Second, it confirmed that the national carbon budgets set by the SNBC are legally binding on the State. Third, it demonstrated that the recours pour excès de pouvoir is an available remedy for challenging insufficient climate action, provided that the applicant demonstrates intérêt à agir (standing) through specific local impacts.

Commune de Grande-Synthe v. France (2022)

Following the Conseil d’État’s 2021 order, the municipality sought further enforcement. In a 2022 decision, the Conseil d’État noted progress in the adoption of the loi Climat et Résilience (Law No. 2021-1104 of 22 August 2021) and the revised SNBC, but ordered continued monitoring of the State’s compliance. The court appointed a collège d’experts to evaluate the government’s implementation of the required measures. The case remains under supervision, representing the most far-reaching judicial oversight of climate policy in French history.

The Charte de l’Environnement as a Constitutional Basis

The Charte de l’environnement (Environmental Charter) of 2005, which was given constitutional status by the loi constitutionnelle du 1er mars 2005, has been central to French climate litigation. Article 1 provides that everyone has the right to live in a balanced environment that respects health. Article 2 imposes a duty on everyone to preserve the environment. Article 3 requires everyone, within the conditions defined by law, to prevent environmental damage or, failing that, to limit its consequences.

The Constitutional Council recognised the Charte as having constitutional value in Decision No. 2008-564 DC of 19 June 2008. The Conseil d’État has applied the Charte directly in climate cases, holding that the State’s obligation to prevent environmental damage is not merely a programmatic aspiration but a legally binding duty. However, the courts have been cautious in defining the precise scope of this duty, generally requiring clear legislative or regulatory benchmarks (such as carbon budgets) before finding a breach.

Climate Justice and Carbon Budgets

French climate litigation has centred on the concept of préjudice écologique (ecological damage), a concept introduced into French law by the loi du 8 août 2016 pour la reconquête de la biodiversité and codified at Article 1247 of the Code civil. Ecological damage covers harm to ecosystems and environmental goods, independent of harm to persons or property. Courts have required the State to demonstrate concrete progress towards meeting carbon budget targets and have imposed timetables for remedial action. The methodology of the Stratégie Nationale Bas-Carbone — which sets five-year carbon budgets aligned with the 2050 carbon neutrality objective — has provided a measurable standard against which State action can be judged.