{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015748031496062992, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01706036745406824, 'mean_word_length': 5.305785123966942, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The networks of human rights and climate change: The State of the Netherlands v Stichting Urgenda, Supreme Court of the Netherlands, 20 December 2019 (19/00135)

Climate change litigators are increasingly relying on a range of different jurisdictional avenues and legal regimes. The recent Urgenda decision by the Dutch Supreme Court provides a surprisingly rare snapshot of the relevance of human rights law to climate change litigation. Focusing on the Supreme Court's reliance on the environmental rights case law from the ECHR, this case note argues that climate change and human rights adjudications takes the form of an adjudicatory network. This network creates spaces for domestic courts to develop contingent responses to emerging climate change claims.