Australia

A large percentage of Australian climate litigation has concerned Environmental impact assessment and environmental permitting requirements, often for proposed coal mines. Notably, Australian state courts have generally agreed that direct GHG emissions should be considered in the permitting process, but have diverged in regards to indirect, or “downstream,” emissions. In the past, they have not usually found emissions sufficient to justify rejection of a proposed project, but more recent cases suggest that they may be becoming more inclined to support rejecting a project principally on climate grounds

Cases

 * Case in the International Criminal Court (ICC)
 * Petition of Torres Strait Islanders to the United Nations Human Rights Committee
 * Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action Incorporated v Environment Protection Authority

Financial Disclosure Cases

 * McVeigh v. Retail Employees Superannuation Trust
 * O’Donnell v. Commonwealth
 * Abrahams v. Commonwealth Bank of Australia

Blocking fossil fuel projects

 * Re Australian Conservation Foundation v. Latrobe City Council
 * Gloucester Resources Limited v. Minister for Planning
 * Gray v. Minister for Planning
 * Sharma v. Minister for the Environment
 * Youth Verdict v. Waratah Coal

Other

 * Montara Oil Spill case - In this case that was decided by the Federal Court of Australia, a Thai oil company was obliged to pay damages to Indonesian seaweed farmers for an oilspill it caused in Australian waters that affected their crops.

Organizations

 * Australian Conservation Foundation
 * Climate Action Network Australia
 * Climate Justice Programme
 * Environmental Law Australia
 * Environmental Justice Australia
 * Environment Victoria
 * Equity Generation Lawyers
 * Friends of the Earth Australia
 * Greenpeace Australia
 * World Wildlife Fund Australia