Que signifie l’avis consultatif de la Cour internationale de Justice sur le changement climatique pour le droit international des investissements ?

This briefing by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) analyzes the implications of a July 2025 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion on climate change for international investment law. It argues that the ICJ's recognition of climate action as a binding legal obligation undermines investor claims based on 'legitimate expectations' for fossil fuel activities and provides states with stronger legal defenses against Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims.

• The ICJ has established that climate action is a binding legal obligation under international law rather than a discretionary political choice. This obligation specifically includes activities such as the production, licensing, and subsidizing of fossil fuels.
• The ICJ characterized climate obligations as 'erga omnes', meaning they are owed to the international community as a whole. This undermines investor claims that they can reasonably expect regulatory frameworks for fossil fuel activities to remain frozen over long periods.
• Judges Bhandari and Cleveland stated that fulfilling climate obligations requires a rapid and drastic reduction or phase-out of fossil fuel production and dependence. This includes stopping practices that directly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, such as extraction and production subsidies.
• The ICJ's recognition of 'regulatory chill'—where the threat of ISDS discourages climate regulation—legitimizes concerns that investment regimes may systematically hinder a state's ability to meet its climate obligations.
• The advisory opinion strengthens state defenses against claims based on Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) and 'legitimate expectations'. It suggests that investors cannot expect states to maintain regulatory frameworks that violate binding international climate obligations.
• The document challenges the traditional 'fair market value' standard for compensation in expropriation cases, arguing that calculating damages based on projected future fossil fuel revenues ignores the reality of stranded assets and legal constraints.
• The briefing recommends that states reform investment treaties by implementing sectoral or measure-based exclusions to remove climate-contrary investments from treaty coverage and by limiting prospective damages.

APA

Schaugg, L. (2026). Que signifie l’avis consultatif de la Cour internationale de Justice sur le changement climatique pour le droit international des investissements ? International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-international-investment-law-fr.pdf

Chicago

Schaugg, Lukas. Que signifie l’avis consultatif de la Cour internationale de Justice sur le changement climatique pour le droit international des investissements ? International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2026. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-international-investment-law-fr.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Schaugg |first1=Lukas |title=Que signifie l’avis consultatif de la Cour internationale de Justice sur le changement climatique pour le droit international des investissements ? |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=March 2026 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-international-investment-law-fr.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{schaugg2026que, author = {Schaugg, Lukas}, title = {{Que signifie l’avis consultatif de la Cour internationale de Justice sur le changement climatique pour le droit international des investissements ?}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2026}, month = mar, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-international-investment-law-fr.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }