By Paul Homewood
h/t Ian Magness
Hot on the heels of the ECHR judgement, we now face the possibility of a rush of silly legal climate cases:
A homeowner who lost his house to coastal erosion is suing the Government for breaching his human rights, in a landmark case following this week’s controversial European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruling on climate change.
Kevin Jordan, 70, a former marine engineer, is one of two Britons who claim their human rights have been violated by the failure of the Government to protect them.
The chances of his groundbreaking case succeeding have been boosted by a ruling by the ECHR on Tuesday that governments have a duty to protect people from climate change.
Mr Jordan’s judicial review is due to be considered this summer by the High Court, where judges will take account of previous legal precedents such as the ECHR ruling. It is likely to intensify the political row after MPs accused the ECHR of usurping the role of elected politicians in determining climate change policies.
Mr Jordan said he had “lost everything” as a result of his chalet bungalow in Hemsby, near Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, being demolished last December. It was pulled down by the council after global warming saw the land protecting it from the sea erode at seven times the predicted rate in the 14 years that he lived there.
“I am now what you call a climate refugee. I lost my home with no compensation. I am now in local authority accommodation. My lovely sea views are reduced to a ground floor flat looking at cars going past,” said Mr Jordan, who spent his career designing and developing underwater vehicles.
Lawyers for Friends of the Earth, which is backing his case, claim that the Government’s failure to protect Mr Jordan from the sea is a breach of section 6 of the Human Rights Act, which covers “unlawful” policies by a public authority that damage people’s rights.
Mr Jordan said he had decided to take on the Government after being asked by the Save Hemsby Coastline campaign group, of which he is a trustee, and having his court costs underwritten through a “huge” local fundraising effort. “It was a natural thing for me to do. I am a bit of a climate warrior,” he said.
He said the “warrior” tag fitted Hemsby as marking the “front line” in the battle against global warming. Last year, 12 houses were condemned and demolished after the coast was battered by storm after storm.
In any normal world, this idiot would be sent packing by the court.
The whole idea that governments have a legal duty to protect everybody from the weather is patently absurd.
And as we know, there is no evidence at all that coastal erosion in Norfolk is any worse than in the past. Jordan’s claim that “global warming saw the land protecting it from the sea erode at seven times the predicted rate in the 14 years that he lived there” is baseless. Sea levels are not rising any faster than they were a century ago, and the Met Office admit that storms are no worse either.
What we do know is that coastal erosion was almost stopped in the 1950s, following sea defences being built. In recent years, these have fallen into decay, and erosion has simply returned to former levels.
If Jordan wants to sue somebody, it should be whoever advised him it was OK to buy the house.
But even if global warming is a factor, how big is it? And given that UK emissions are only 1% of the world’s, then clearly anything we do is irrelevant.
Which brings us back to the essence of the case. Jordan and his backers at FoE claim that the government has a duty to protect him from rising seas and storms.
Any proper judge would throw the case out immediately, but there are plenty of left wing, activist judges who could nod this through.
If this happens, it would open the door to all sorts of nutty claims from people who have been affected by floods, storms, snow and every other weather event.
There will only be one winner – the lawyers. And only one loser, the taxpayer.
Final word to the DT commenters:
