“It’s very sad to see.”

A ‘significant reset’ of international law

McDonnell said the decision was “a very significant reset of the understanding of international law at the moment”.

The coastline of Port Vila, Vanuatu, pictured several years ago, is under threat due to climate change. Source: Getty / Mario Tama

Aidan Craney, a lecturer and research fellow in the Centre for Human Security and Social Change at La Trobe University and whose research focuses on youth leadership and livelihoods in the Pacific, also called it a “historic ruling”.

“Examining that evidence, the court supported the consensus from scientists: climate change is real, climate change is driven by human actions such as the burning of fossil fuels, and that we need to keep global warming below 1.5C for the best chance to preserve our environment and way of life.”

What does the ICJ opinion set out?

“All together, that set of obligations is going to have a really profound implication, I think for both future climate litigation and for climate negotiations between states in the United Nations and under various treaties,” McDonnell said.

Which obligations could impact Australia?

“The whole of the Pacific is waiting to see what Australia is going to submit in terms of a 1.5 degree pathway,” McDonnell said.

“How Australia responds to this ruling will have dramatic implications for its relationships with its Pacific neighbours. We can either show solidarity or lose all legitimacy.”

“The unprecedented participation by other countries in the ICJ proceedings reflects that we’re not alone in recognising the challenges and opportunities of responding to climate change.”

Climate cases ‘increasingly’ being brought to courts

While accepting many of the key facts the Uncles had presented to the court regarding the effects of human-induced climate change on the Torres Strait Islands, Judge Michael Wigney ruled there was not a duty of care under negligence law.

“I think there will be renewed efforts that will refer back to this advisory opinion, even though it is based in international law.”

‘Only a matter of time’

She said while the advisory isn’t legally binding, it “holds great moral and legal authority”.

Youth Ambassadors and youth climate activists demonstrate ahead of the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion. Source: Supplied / Save the Children

When it comes to Australia’s role, Trief said: “It’s really important that their actions reflect their empathy for our smaller developing states in the Pacific”.