And while the court has now dismissed Lliuya’s specific claim – finding the flood risk to Lliuya’s particular property is not yet sufficiently great – it did confirm that private companies can in principle be held liable for their share in causing climate damages.
Do cases that end in dismissal set precedent?
The case was in Germany, precedent is not a thing there in the ex-British colony / common law sense, there is no legal definition of that. Judges rule based on the law, not based on how other judges ruled before. They have much less power in that sense, look at for example the lawsuits Meta tried against EU regulations, you can’t just escalate a lawsuit to a point where a court could override law. Constitutional review happens before legislation, not after.
When we speak of precedent in a civil law country a judicial Overton-window is shifting so that it’s normal to hold fossil fuel companies accountable. Other judges will consider it not because of the law, but because this is normal now.
