Medical Evidence Strengthens Legal Actions Against Polluters

Experts are increasingly highlighting the role of medical and scientific evidence in holding public authorities accountable for the health impacts of unlawful air pollution. According to an article in the BMJ, researchers from the University of Oxford, Gaia Lisi and Rupert Stuart-Smith, assert that while relatively few studies have linked health impacts directly to climate change, advancements in research methods are paving the way for new avenues of accountability.

Recent legal cases illustrate the growing importance of medical and scientific findings in defending human rights related to health. Notably, the inquest into the death of 9-year-old Ella Aadoo-Kissi-Debrah in the UK concluded that her exposure to high levels of air pollution significantly contributed to her death. Similarly, the European Court of Human Rights used peer-reviewed research in a case against Italy to establish a “real and imminent risk” to life due to environmental factors.

Growing Role of Medical Evidence in Climate Litigation

In France, civil liability cases have seen medical evidence used to demonstrate causal links between short-term spikes in air pollution and exacerbation of respiratory symptoms in children. Lisi and Stuart-Smith emphasize that as the body of scientific evidence continues to expand, its role in legal proceedings is likely to become even more significant. This trend follows recent advisory opinions from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the International Court of Justice, which assert that states have specific obligations to protect individuals from the life-threatening effects of climate change.

Medical experts are playing a crucial role in aiding courts to understand the necessary protections needed to uphold health-related laws. They contribute to this process by conducting research that supports legal arguments, serving as expert witnesses, and providing third-party evidence. The authors note, “Improved understanding of the health consequences of climate change could clarify the extent to which states are fulfilling their legal obligations to protect health.”

Implications for Future Legal Action

In a related article, Laura Clarke from ClientEarth and Hugh Montgomery from University College London indicate that landmark court decisions signal a shift in accountability for major polluters. They argue that both states and corporations can no longer claim ignorance regarding the impacts of their activities on health. “As attribution science strengthens further, we expect to see more class actions and damages claims brought by climate-affected communities,” they state.

Health professionals are encouraged to engage actively in characterizing and attributing the causes of deaths and diseases linked to climate change, including the direct health effects of heatwaves on conditions such as kidney and heart disease. They also acknowledge that developing new models will be essential for attributing socioeconomic impacts related to climate change.

The authors conclude that to make progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is vital to hold major polluters accountable through legal channels. “Medical professionals, everywhere, should play their part in this process,” they assert. As the intersection of health and environmental law continues to evolve, the potential for climate justice grows stronger.

For further details, refer to the publication, “Medical evidence drove legal action to clean up the air we breathe—climate justice may be next” in the BMJ, published in 2025 (DOI: 10.1136/bmj.r1568).