Greenpeace Austria et al. v. Austria

Background
In February 2020, Greenpeace Austria and over eight thousand individuals went to the Austrian constitutional court to defend their human rights from the climate crisis. They are demanding that the government repeal certain legal provisions and regulations favouring the use of traveling by plane over taking the train, specifically VAT-exemption on international flights and tax-exemption on kerosine domestic flights. Both tax exemptions add to the problem that flying is cheaper than taking the train, although a train ride is 31 times more climate friendly than taking the plane. Every Austrian, who was able to prove that they are affected by this unjust law (.e.g. by presenting an international train ticket or a Bonus Card for the Austrian railway operator) could join the class action lawsuit.

Relevant Law and Principles

 * Paris Agreement
 * European Convention on Human Rights

Ruling
On September 30, 2020 the Constitutional Court dismissed the case as inadmissible on the grounds that rail passengers do not have standing to sue over preferential tax treatment given to air travel.

Takeaways
This was the first climate class action lawsuit in Austria and built on a nearly successful attempt by NGOs to get the Austrian Federal Administrative Court to overturn the approval of construction of a third runway at Vienna’s main airport based on climate grounds. It was also the first climate case that challenges general government subsidies for the aviation sector, as opposed to challenging individual airport expansions, which could result in systemic change.

This case is groundbreaking as it was the first climate case that connects human rights and the role of aviation in the climate crisis. It’s also the first time that the inequity in treatment between the public transport sector (trains) and aviation sector is addressed.

Links

 * Grantham Research Institute
 * Sabin Center Database