Energy and Climate Law

Today the new European Commission 2019-2024 has finally been voted into office by the European Parliament. Parliament voted on the von der Leyen Commission and approved it by 461 votes to 157 against, with 89 abstentions. Earlier, the European Parliament only gave its approval of 23 of the 26 candidates in a first round of hearings . It rejected Rovana Plumb, Laszlo Trocsanyi and Sylvie Goulard. The Member States Romania, Hungary and France had to nominate new candidates, accordingly and parliament accepted these only after a second round of hearings. Today`s  vote means that the five-year term of the Commission can reasonably be expected to begin on 1 December, although the new Commission still needs to be formally appointed by EU heads of state or government. The UK abstained from nominating a Commissioner, given the pending Brexit. Energy and Climate matters are represented in the new Commission by two people: Kadri Simson from Estonia is the new Commissioner for Energy. She wil

A new article has been published in the journal European Energy and Environmental Law Review  (Ruven Fleming `The `Trias`- A New Methodology For Energy Law` (October 2019) Volume 28 Number 5 European Energy and Environmental Law Review pages 2 - 13). The abstract can be found below and the article will become available online here .

Yesterday the administrative court of Berlin rejected a climate case brought by three German organic farmers and their families together with Greenpeace. According to the claimants the court should rule that the German government is not doing enough to meet its own climate targets. Germany is highly likely to miss its aim of reducing Co2 emissions by 40 % in 2020, compared to 1990 levels. That aim was spelled out in a cabinet decision of the German government (inter alia, page 4 of its 2010 energy concept ), but never made it into actual law. The claimants argued that, precisely because of the fact that a climate law was lacking in Germany by that time, this political decision of the government acquired legally binding status, as opposed to a pure political ´good will´ obligation. The case, in trying to compel a government to make good on its own climate action promises, somewhat resembles the infamo us Urgenda case (discussed earlier on this blog ), but there are significant differe