Brussels, 2nd Sept 2026 – Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe and the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN) regret the General Court of the European Union’s decision to decline to consider the compatibility of the EU’s 2030 climate targets with the EU’s obligations under environmental law. Even more so since plaintiffs’ claim that the EU 2030 climate targets are consistent with a catastrophic 3°C of global warming was uncontested by the European Commission itself.
The case challenged the European Commission’s annual emissions allocations under the Effort Sharing Regulation, which set binding national emissions limits for 2021–2030 in sectors including buildings, transport, agriculture and waste. CAN Europe and GLAN argued that these allocations are too weak and fail to reflect the level of emissions cuts required to keep global warming to 1.5°C.
With today’s ruling, the Court did not examine the substance of these arguments. Instead, it found that the claims brought were unfounded for procedural reasons. The General Court held that it could not scrutinise climate targets set out in EU legislation under the procedure used by the Applicant NGOs. Importantly, it did not reject the Applicants’ argument that the EU’s emissions targets are incompatible with the EU’s obligations under international environmental and human rights law.
The ruling follows a broader pattern already seen in previous cases, including the People’s Climate Case, where EU courts also did not assess the substance of the challenge because of admissibility barriers. This is another sign that, for now, it remains extremely difficult for NGOs and the wider public to challenge the adequacy of EU climate ambition before EU courts.
“After a summer where wildfires, droughts and extreme heat devastated lives and livelihoods across Europe, this ruling does not lessen the urgent need for strong EU climate action with clear rules at its core. At a time of concerted efforts to weaken climate legislation, the European Commission should champion the rule of law needed to drive climate ambition, accountability and action. said Sven Harmeling, Head of Climate at CAN Europe.
“At no point in the case did the Commission challenge our evidence which shows that the EU’s emissions targets are aligned with a catastrophic 3°C of global warming this century,” said Gerry Liston, Legal Co-Lead at GLAN. “Rulings already delivered by the European Court of Human Rights and International Court of Justice make clear that this is a flagrant violation of the EU’s international legal obligations. Nothing about today’s ruling by the EU court contradicts our position that the EU’s targets are grossly insufficient and therefore, illegal.”
Today’s outcome does not alter the need for the EU and its Member States to fulfil their climate commitments by 2030, including in the sectors covered by the Effort Sharing Regulation. CAN Europe and GLAN will continue calling for stronger implementation of existing laws and for greater climate ambition in line with science, equity and human rights.
ENDS
Notes to editors
The case concerned Commission Implementing Decision 2023/1319, which sets annual emissions allocations under the Effort Sharing Regulation for sectors representing around 57–60% of EU greenhouse gas emissions. The applicants argued that the Commission failed to assess what emissions reductions are needed to limit warming to 1.5°C, what constitutes the EU’s fair share, what deeper domestic cuts are feasible by 2030, and how inadequate climate action affects fundamental rights.
In its last year’s climate ruling, the International Court of Justice confirmed that wealthy countries’ emissions cuts must reflect their historical responsibility and economic capacity, and that they must do everything possible to reduce emissions. The European Court of Human Rights has similarly held that European States must adopt science-based targets aligned with 1.5°C.
The European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change’s report, relied on by the claimant NGOs, found that the EU’s 2030 target falls far short of its fair share of the reductions needed to limit warming to 1.5°C. It also concluded that significantly deeper EU emissions cuts by 2030 are feasible.
The claimant organisations also relied on the Climate Action Tracker methodology to show that the EU’s 2030 target is aligned with 3°C of global warming this century, if all countries make a similar effort as the EU.
FOR MORE INFORMATION and media requests:
James O’Connor, Senior Commuications Coordinator, Climate Action Network Europe.
Email: james.oconnor (at) caneurope.org.