[Verse 1[
Ruled against the rule
The citizen’s tool
Ruled against the rule
Who’s the royal fool?
[Chorus]
The government broke the law
Not surprising, after all
Seems childhood dreams
Aren’t what they seemed.
[Bridge]
High Court decision:
Defeat
Yet, upbeat
The children win
Let a new age begin
[Instrumental]
[Verse 2]
Ruled against the tool
The children rule
Ruled against the rule
Enough rule by the cruel
[Chorus]
The government broke the law
Not surprising, after all
Seems childhood dreams
Aren’t what they seemed.
[Bridge]
High Court decision:
Defeat
Yet, upbeat
The children win
Let a new age begin
[Instrumental, Hammond B3 Organ]
[Verse 3]
Ruled against the cruel
The children’s energy, fuel
Ruled against the rule
The rule sent back to school
[Chorus]
The government broke the law
Not surprising, after all
Seems childhood dreams
Aren’t what they seemed.
[Outro]
High Court decision:
Defeat
Yet, upbeat
The children win
Let a new age begin
[End]
In England, when you lose a court case, it is commonly referred to as being “defeated” or “unsuccessful” in the legal proceedings. Additionally, if a judgment is issued against you, you are said to have “lost” the case or been “ruled against.”
A SCIENCE LESSON
Litigation seeking compensation for loss and damage caused by the actions of oil companies and governments has the potential to reshape global economics. In the past year, several legal rulings have held governments accountable for their role in exacerbating the climate crisis, signaling a shift in legal accountability and prompting broader discussions on environmental responsibility.
The latest example,n May 3, 2024, a High Court judge delivered a significant ruling, declaring the U.K. government’s actions unlawful in approving a climate plan aimed at meeting crucial emission reduction targets without sufficient evidence of its feasibility. This marked the second occasion in two years where the government’s primary climate strategy faced legal challenge and was deemed inadequate in aligning with legally-binding commitments to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Justice Clive Sheldon’s decision, following a case brought forth by three environmental organizations, underscored the government’s failure to substantiate its approval of the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan from the previous year. The judge concluded that the government lacked justification and the plan was “simply not justified by the evidence.”