Content of states obligations to prevent transboundary damage in maritime areas due to climate change

Climate change increasingly affects various aspects of human activity each year, resulting in growing transboundary damage. Consequently, the author aims to analyze the obligations of states to prevent transboundary damage, drawing on the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the principles of customary international law. The article examines the obligations of states under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, with a particular focus on the principles of prevention of transboundary damage and due diligence, as well as their interrelationship. To deepen the understanding of due diligence within the context of international environmental law and climate change, the author analyses both the position of the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law on due diligence, as well as the Advisory Opinion of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea on the request of the Commission of Small Island States. In examining the ITLOS Advisory Opinion, the positions of States on climate change and its impact on public order and life are also explored. Currently, there is a discernible trend towards increased climate litigation and the development of international environmental law, as evidenced not only in the multitude of disputes before national and international courts but also in the pending Advisory Opinions before the International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The article also discusses the problem of determining the existence of international legal liability for transboundary damage and explores the ways and forms of redress. In situations involving transboundary damage, the affected state, as the victim, must prove a wrongful act, namely a breach of an international obligation, attributable to the other state. Thus, the paper analyzes the obligations of states to prevent transboundary damage, using the law of the sea as an illustrative example, and also raises the issue of state liability.