Climate Change Litigation in Georgia — the Real Picture
Georgia has no separate, specialised court or special procedural track for disputes connected with climate change. Climate litigation here means litigation before the courts of general jurisdiction under the ordinary rules of procedure, where claims are grounded in the instruments of environmental legislation established by the Law of Georgia on Environmental Protection: the rights of citizens, the basic principles of environmental protection, the greenhouse gas emission authorization regime, and the rules for compensating damage caused to the environment. This page explains through which links a climate related dispute can be turned into a court case and where the legal footholds of such a case lie.
It is important to set expectations at the outset. The legal regulation of climate change in Georgia today consists of norms for the emission of greenhouse gases and obligations to reduce them, not of a separate climate statute. The path to success in court therefore runs through the precise application of environmental mechanisms — and it is exactly those mechanisms that we examine in detail below, because a climate claim drafted without them is a claim without a legal basis.
The Citizen's Right to Demand Change of Decisions on Ecologically Dangerous Objects
The most direct link to climate litigation is written into the catalogue of citizens' rights. A citizen has the right to demand, through the courts, the change of decisions on the siting, design, construction, reconstruction and exploitation of ecologically dangerous objects. This means that where a decision of the state or an administrative body concerns a major emitting installation — for example, industrial equipment whose fuel cycle is connected with the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere — an interested citizen may ask the court to change that decision.
This is reinforced by the other rights of the citizen that serve as footholds in climate disputes: the right to live in an environment harmless and healthy for one's health; the right to enjoy the natural environment; the right to receive complete, objective and timely information on the state of the working and living environment; the right to unite in environmental public organisations and to participate in the consideration and adoption of significant decisions in the field of environmental protection; and the right to receive compensation for damage caused by the non fulfilment of the requirements of the environmental legislation in force. Together these rights form a procedural arsenal that allows climate concerns to be articulated as justiciable claims rather than abstract complaints.
The Basic Principles as Arguments in Court
When planning and carrying out activities, state authorities and all natural and legal persons are obliged to be guided by the basic principles of environmental protection. In climate disputes these principles carry a dual function: they govern the conduct of operators and, at the same time, provide the courts with a means of interpretation when a concrete norm does not directly cover the context of the dispute.
Particularly important for climate litigation are: the risk reduction principle, under which the subject of an activity must take appropriate measures to prevent or reduce the risk of harmful impact on the environment and human health; the polluter pays principle, under which the subject of an activity is obliged to compensate the damage caused to the environment; the restitution principle concerning the restoration of degraded environment; the environmental impact assessment principle; the sustainability principle, which ties the use of natural resources to their protection from irreversible quantitative and qualitative changes; and the accessibility of information principle, which secures access to evidence in climate disputes. Invoking these principles does not replace proving the facts, but it frames the standard of conduct against which the defendant's behaviour is measured.
Greenhouse Gas Emission Authorization as the Subject of Disputes
The central element of the climate protection regime is the authorization of greenhouse gas emissions. In order to protect the climate of the earth from global changes, the subject of an activity is obliged to observe the norms for the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and to carry out measures for their reduction, while the emission of these gases is regulated on the basis of the integrated pollution control system.
For the activities determined by a resolution of the Government of Georgia, an authorization is required; it is issued, except for aviation activities, by the National Environment Agency, and for aviation activities by the Civil Aviation Agency. The authorization is issued for an unlimited term, but it is declared invalid if the activity is not started within 5 years from obtaining the authorization, or if it is suspended for 2 calendar years and the operator fails to substantiate repair or renovation works. This means that in a climate dispute the contested matter may be not only the fact of emission but also the existence, content and operation of the authorization — and it is here that the most realistic opportunity for judicial control arises, because the authorization is an individual administrative legal act subject to review.
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
The second circuit of greenhouse gas governance consists of monitoring and reporting obligations. The operator is obliged to conduct monitoring of emissions on the basis of the monitoring plan and, every year, no later than 31 March of the relevant year, to submit to the issuing authority an annual report which must be verified by a verifier. After receiving the verified report, the authority ensures its publication on the environmental information portal.
For climate litigation these obligations are a source of the evidentiary base: published reports are open to the public and may underpin both an administrative claim and a court action. The detailed operational requirements in this field enter into force on 1 January 2028, which means that the full fledged reporting system is being established in stages — a factor to weigh when assessing the availability of evidence for a claim brought today. Within the scheme of carbon offsetting and reduction for international aviation, the relevant requirements are established by an order of the director of the Civil Aviation Agency.
State Control and the Ten Year Limitation Period
In the sphere of environmental protection and the use of natural resources, state control is exercised by the ministry, the department, the Agency of Protected Areas, the Agency of Nuclear and Radiation Safety and the state forest management body. The department's inspection covers scheduled or unscheduled checks and visits; a check is based on an individual administrative legal act, whose appeal does not suspend the check. Imposition of liability on the perpetrator of a violation does not release that person from the obligation to compensate the damage caused to the environment.
Finally, the factor of time: the limitation period for a claim for damage caused to the environment is 10 years from the moment the right to claim arises. The right arises when the supervisory authority learned of the damage and of the person obliged to compensate it. When planning climate litigation, this period must be treated as the minimum calendar boundary — ten years from the moment the state authority recorded the damage and the liable person — beyond which the claim can no longer be brought.