On April 8, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered a landmark decision in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland, finding that States have a legal duty to take action to mitigate climate change. Ruling in favor of a Swiss association of over 2,000 Swiss women, the Court found that the Swiss government violated the human rights of its citizens by failing to do enough to combat climate change. 

The original complaint, presented to the Court by four women and a Swiss association Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz, centered around the impact of climate change on their living conditions and health. They argued that the government's inaction on climate change put them at risk of heatwave-related deaths, with their age and gender making them particularly vulnerable. While the Court deemed the four individual applicants inadmissible, stating that they did not meet the victim-status requirements under Article 34 of the Convention, it recognized the right of the applicant association to file a complaint.

Ultimately, the Court determined that the Swiss Confederation had neglected its duty to fulfill its positive obligations under the Convention concerning  the right to respect for private and family life of the Convention, interpreting it as freedom from environmental threats to one's personal life, and a violation of the right to access to the Court. Failure by Switzerland to revise its policies may lead to additional legal actions at the domestic level, potentially resulting in court-imposed financial penalties. 

Alongside this ruling, the Court rejected two other climate-related cases on procedural grounds – a group of young Portuguese people against 32 European governments and another by a former mayor of a French coastal town. However, the result in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen is expected to encourage more communities to bring climate change litigation, adding to the already increasing number of climate lawsuits brought by citizens against governments that hinge on human rights law. The judgment may also impact forthcoming decisions at the Strasbourg court, which had suspended six other climate-related cases awaiting these rulings.