This analysis reveals challenges in corporate target-setting cases regarding emissions reduction and legal obligations.
Key Points
Success in corporate target-setting cases depends on courts' engagement with science-based mitigation pathways, as claimants push for enforceable targets.
1.5°C-compatible pathways are favored in litigation, rejecting reliance on speculative carbon dioxide removal technologies for compliance.
Analysis of high-profile cases demonstrates the filtering of normative criteria in legal reasoning and strategic claimant approaches.
Judicial responses show reluctance to impose granular emissions targets, emphasizing the need for a proactive approach towards mitigation scenarios.