Кліматичне судочинство як правовий діалог в Європейському Союзі та за його межами

The article examines the evolution of legal mechanisms for addressing climate change at the domestic, regional, and international levels, with particular focus on the jurisprudence of European courts and the 2025 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. The purpose of the study is to identify the role of judicial practice in strengthening climate governance and to analyze how climate litigation generates a broader legal dialogue that links EU law, international human rights law, and general international law. Methodologically, the research relies on doctrinal and comparative analysis of treaty law, case law of national courts and the European Court of Human Rights, recent advisory opinions of the ICJ, ITLOS and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, as well as reports of international organizations and specialized academic literature. The research demonstrates that landmark European cases such as Urgenda, Neubauer, Klimaatzaak and KlimaSeniorinnen have transformed climate change from a predominantly political issue into a justiciable matter of rights and duties. They articulate positive obligations of states to adopt effective mitigation measures, link inadequate climate action to violations of rights to life and private life, and introduce a forward-looking, intergenerational dimension to the protection of fundamental rights. On this basis, climate governance increasingly acquires the features of a legalised regime in which courts can effectively compel states to adjust their climate policies. Building on this domestic and regional practice, the 2025 ICJ advisory opinion, initiated by the European Union together with vulnerable states, consolidates emerging trends by characterizing certain climate-related obligations as erga omnes duties owed to the international community as a whole, and by integrating elements of treaty law, customary law, human rights standards and the law of the sea. Importantly, the Court also affirms that persons displaced by climate change cannot be returned to conditions that endanger their life, dignity or fundamental rights, which de facto extends the rationale of the non-refoulement principle to climate-displaced persons. Overall, the article argues that climate litigation in and beyond the EU functions as a form of legal dialogue that gradually reduces fragmentation between different regimes of international law and strengthens the normative basis of global climate governance. The practical significance of the study is that this emerging body of case law not only clarifies the scope and legal character of climate-related duties but also enhances the negotiating position of vulnerable and EU member states in multilateral climate processes and provides a more robust foundation for future strategic litigation.