With the Paris Agreement, countries established an enhanced transparency frame work (ETF). Under ETF, starting in 2024, countries will report transparently on actions taken and progress in climate change mitigation, adaptation measures and support provided or received. It also provides for international procedures for the review of the submitted reports.
The information gathered through the ETF will feed into the Global stocktake which will assess the collective progress towards the long-term climate goals. This will lead to recommendations for countries to set more ambitious plans in the next round.
Although climate change action needs to be massively increased to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, the years since its entry into force have already sparked low-carbon solutions and new markets. More and more countries, regions, cities and companies are establishing carbon neutrality targets. Zero-carbon solutions are becoming competitive across economic sectors representing 25% of emissions. This trend is most noticeable in the power and transport sectors and has created many new business opportunities for early movers. By 2030, zero-carbon solutions could be competitive in sectors representing over 70% of global emissions.
(Extracted with edits from the website UNFCCC.INT)
What is the central, long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement?
Show Hint
- To limit the global temperature increase to exactly 1.5 degrees
- To hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees.
- To reduce the global average temperature to pre-industrial levels by the year 2100.
- To limit the global temperature increase to 3 degrees above pre-industrial levels.
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The question asks for the specific long-term temperature goal as stated in the Paris Agreement.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
Article 2 of the Paris Agreement sets out its long-term goals. The central temperature goal is twofold:
1. Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels.
2. Pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.
Option (B) accurately captures this dual-faceted goal.
- (A) is incorrect because 1.5°C is the aspirational target, not the primary binding limit, which is "well below 2°C".
- (C) is incorrect; the goal is to limit the *increase* from pre-industrial levels, not return to them.
- (D) is incorrect as the limit is well below 2°C, not 3°C.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The central goal is to hold the temperature increase to well below 2 degrees and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees.
The Paris Agreement calls for a process to periodically assess the collective progress toward achieving its long-term goals. What is this process called?
Show Hint
- The Compliance Mechanism
- The Global Stocktake
- The Transparency Framework
- The Adaptation Communication
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The question asks for the name of the process within the Paris Agreement that periodically assesses collective progress towards its goals.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The passage provides the answer directly: "The information gathered through the ETF will feed into the Global stocktake which will assess the collective progress towards the long-term climate goals." This process is designed to be a comprehensive check-in every five years to see how the world is doing collectively and to inform the next round of national climate plans (NDCs).
- (A) The Compliance Mechanism is a separate process to facilitate implementation and promote compliance.
- (C) The Transparency Framework (ETF) is the system for reporting data that *feeds into* the Global Stocktake. It is the reporting part, not the assessment part.
- (D) Adaptation Communication is a vehicle for countries to report on their adaptation priorities and needs.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The process for periodically assessing collective progress is called the Global Stocktake.
Which previous International Climate Treaty did the Paris Agreement succeed and replace in terms of its operational framework after 2020?
Show Hint
- The Montreal Protocol
- The Basel Convention
- The Kyoto Protocol
- The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The question asks which international climate treaty's framework was replaced by the Paris Agreement after the year 2020.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The international climate change regime is structured under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
- The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997 as a protocol to the UNFCCC. It established legally binding emission reduction targets for developed countries for a first commitment period (2008-2012) and a second one (2013-2020).
- The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, was designed to create a new, comprehensive framework that would apply to all countries from 2020 onwards, succeeding the Kyoto Protocol's approach.
The other treaties listed deal with different environmental issues:
- (A) The Montreal Protocol deals with ozone-depleting substances.
- (B) The Basel Convention deals with the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.
- (D) The CBD deals with the conservation of biological diversity.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The Paris Agreement succeeded the Kyoto Protocol as the main operational instrument under the UNFCCC for the post-2020 period.
The Paris Agreement establishes a clear distinction in obligations between developed and developing countries regarding:
Show Hint
- The long-term temperature goal, with different limits for each group.
- Mitigation efforts, by requiring only developed countries to submit NDCs.
- Climate finance, by requiring developed countries to provide financial resources to assist developing countries.
- The principle of sovereignty, by allowing only developing countries to withdraw from the Agreement.
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The question asks in which area the Paris Agreement maintains a clear differentiation in the obligations between developed and developing countries.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
While the Paris Agreement moved away from the strict bifurcation of the Kyoto Protocol, it still upholds the principle of "Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities" (CBDR-RC). This differentiation is most pronounced in the area of climate finance.
(A) The long-term temperature goal is global and applies to all countries collectively. Incorrect.
(B) A key feature of the Paris Agreement is that all countries (both developed and developing) are required to submit Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) for mitigation. Incorrect.
(C) Article 9 of the Paris Agreement explicitly states that developed countries shall provide financial resources to assist developing countries with both mitigation and adaptation. While developing countries are encouraged to provide support voluntarily, the primary obligation rests with developed nations. This is a clear distinction. Correct.
(D) The right to withdraw from the Agreement is available to any party, not just developing countries. Incorrect.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The clearest distinction in obligations is in climate finance, where developed countries are obligated to provide financial assistance to developing countries.
The mechanism known as "Loss and Damage" in the context of climate change, which addresses the unavoidable adverse effects of climate change, is reinforced in the Paris Agreement through the:
Show Hint
- Technology Executive Committee.
- Global Stocktake.
- Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM).
- Adaptation Fund.
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The question asks to identify the specific mechanism through which the concept of "Loss and Damage" is addressed within the Paris Agreement.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
"Loss and Damage" refers to the impacts of climate change that go beyond what people can adapt to. This includes both extreme weather events (like hurricanes) and slow-onset events (like sea-level rise).
- The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM) was established in 2013 at COP 19 in Warsaw.
- Article 8 of the Paris Agreement formally recognizes the importance of averting, minimizing, and addressing loss and damage and explicitly anchors the WIM as the primary vehicle under the Agreement to address this issue.
- The other options are related but distinct: The Technology Executive Committee deals with technology transfer, the Global Stocktake assesses progress, and the Adaptation Fund finances adaptation projects. The WIM is specifically dedicated to Loss and Damage.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) is the mechanism that addresses Loss and Damage and is reinforced by Article 8 of the Paris Agreement.
Top Questions on Environmental Law
Today, in the year 2025, we have been experiencing the drastic consequences of large scale destruction of environment on human lives in the capital city of our country and in many other cities. At least for a span of two months every year, the residents of Delhi suffocate due to air pollution. The AQI level is either dangerous or very dangerous. They suffer in their health. The other leading cities are not far behind. The air and water pollution in the cities is ever increasing. Therefore, coming out with measures such as the 2021 Official Memorandum is violative of fundamental rights of all persons guaranteed under Article 21 to live in a pollution free environment. It also infringes the right to health guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The 2021 OM talks about the concept of development. Can there be development at the cost of environment? Conservation of environment and its improvement is an essential part of the concept of development. Therefore, going out of the way by issuing such OMs to protect those who have caused harm to the environment has to be deprecated by the Courts which are under a constitutional and statutory mandate to uphold the fundamental right under Article 21 and to protect the environment. In fact, the Courts should comedown heavily on such attempts. As stated earlier, the 2021 OM deals with project proponents who were fully aware of the EIA notification and who have taken conscious risk to flout the EIA notification and go ahead with the construction/continuation/expansion of projects. They have shown scant respect to the law and their duty to protect the environment. Apart from violation of Article 21, such action is completely arbitrary which is violative article 14 of the Constitution of India, besides being violative of the 1986 Act and the EIA notification.
(Extracted with edits from Vanashakti v. Union of India, 2025 INSC 718)- CLAT PG - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Environmental Law
- Air Pollutant under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 would include: (A) Solid Substance
(B) Liquid Substance
(C) Noise
(D) Chimney Choose the correct answer from the options given below:- CUET (PG) - 2025
- LLM
- Environmental Law
- In which of the following case it was laid down that 'Universities to prescribe compulsory course on environment at every level in college education':
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- LLM
- Environmental Law
- __________ means any substance or preparation which, by reason of its chemical or physico-chemical properties or handling, is liable to cause harm to human beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organism, property, or the environment as per Section 2 (e) of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Environmental Law
- In which of the following cases the Supreme Court has recognized the right against the adverse effects of climate change?
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Environmental Law
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
The document presents a critique of the United Nations (UN) organization, arguing that it has failed to carry out its charter-mandated tasks, specifically to ”maintain international peace and security” and ”to achieve international cooperation” in solving global problems. The author notes growing public frustration with catastrophic humanitarian situations and the failure of peace-keeping operations, leading to widespread scepticism about the possibility of ”revitalization”.
UN Reform Approaches
Discussions on UN reform are divided into two main categories: the conservative approach and the radical approach.
1. Conservative Approach:
The conservative view considers the existing Charter ”practically untouchable” and believes in improving ”collective security” as defined in Chapter VII. Key positions include:
- US Position: Prioritizes its own interests, supports better management and the creation of an Inspector General, favours enlarging the Security Council (to include Germany and Japan, mainly for financing peace-keeping), and associates the UN with regional organizations like NATO for peace enforcement. The US remains reluctant to allow full application of Chapter VII and views collective security restrictively.
- Secretary-General’s Position (Boutros Ghali): Advocated for the full implementation of ’collective security’ as envisaged in 1945, including the use of the Military Staff Committee (Article 47) and the conclusion of special agreements (Article 43) for providing armed forces. He also proposed ’peace enforcement units’ under the command of the Secretary-General and wider use of ’preventive diplomacy’. The report candidly recognized the Security Council’s incapacity to deal with threats from a major power.
2. Radical Approach:
The radical approach criticizes the principles of the present system and proposes an overhaul. It reflects increasing doubts about the value of the Charter’s collective security system, especially in intra-State conflicts. Radical proposals include:
- Establishing an Economic Security Council.
- Modifying the Charter with less reluctance.
- Reforming the IMF and World Bank.
- Developing a new global security system .
- The creation of a consultative parliamentary assembly at the world level.
Future Outlook:
The author asserts that no major or minor reform has any chance of being implemented now, primarily because the Charter’s amendment procedures (requiring a two-thirds majority including all five permanent Security Council members) preclude agreement. However, he concludes that the continuing deterioration of the global situation, driven by economic integration, rising inequality, and intra-State conflicts, will inevitably lead the political establishment to define a new global institutional structure. This future debate will become highly political.
- CLAT PG - 2026
- International Law
“Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act says that when a party to a contract promises to do a certain thing within a specified time but fails to do so, the contract or so much of it as has not been performed, becomes voidable at the option of the promisee if the intention of the parties was, that time should be of the essence of the contract. If time is not the essence of the contract, the contract does not become voidable by the failure to do such thing on or before the specified time but the promisee is entitled to compensation from the promisor for any loss occasioned to him by such failure. Further, if in case of a contract voidable on account of the promisor’s failure to perform his promise within the time agreed and the promisee accepts performance of such promise at any time other than that agreed, the promisee cannot claim compensation for any loss occasioned by the non-performance of the promise at the time agreed, unless, at the time of such acceptance he gives notice to the promisor of his intention to do so.
Sections 73 and 74 deal with consequences of breach of contract. Heading of Sec tion 73 is compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract. When a contract is broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive from the party who has broken the contract compensation for any loss or damage caused to him thereby which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach or which the parties knew when they made the contract to be likely to result from the breach of it. On the other hand, Section 74 deals with compen sation for breach of contract where penalty is stipulated for. When a contract is broken, if a sum is mentioned in the contract as the amount to be paid in case of such breach or if the contract contains any other stipulation by way of penalty, the party complaining of the breach is entitled whether or not actually damage or loss is proved to have been caused thereby, to receive from the party who has broken the contract reasonable compensation not exceeding the amount so named or the penalty stipulated for.”
tracted from: Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited v Software Technol ogy Parks of India 2025 INSC 574- CLAT PG - 2026
- Contract Law
“Law treats all contracts with equal respect and unless a contract is proved to suffer from any of the vitiating factors, the terms and conditions have to be enforced regardless of the relative strengths and weakness of the parties.
Section 28 of the Contract Act does not bar exclusive jurisdiction clauses. What has been barred is the absolute restriction of any party from approaching a legal forum. The right to legal adjudication cannot be taken away from any party through contract but can be relegated to a set of Courts for the ease of the parties. In the present dispute, the clause does not take away the right of the employee to pursue a legal claim but only restricts the employee to pursue those claims before the courts in Mumbai alone.
... the Court must already have jurisdiction to entertain such a legal claim. This limb pertains to the fact that a contract cannot confer jurisdiction on a court that did not have such a jurisdiction in the first place.”
Extracted from: Rakesh Kumar Verma v HDFC Bank Ltd 2025 INSC 473- CLAT PG - 2026
- Contract Law
- “The law is well settled that a constitutional court can award monetary compen sation against the State and its officials for its failure to safeguard fundamental rights of citizens but there is no system or method to measure the damages caused in such situations. Quite often the courts have a difficult task in determining dam ages in various fact situations. The yardsticks normally adopted for determining the compensation payable in private tort claims are not as such applicable when a constitutional court determines the compensation in cases where there is a viola tion of fundamental rights guaranteed to its citizens.
... In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. [(1997) SCC 1 416], a Constitution Bench of this Court held that there is no straitjacket formula for computation of damages and we find that there is no uniformity or yardstick followed in awarding damages for violation of fundamental rights. In Rudul Sah case [Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, (1983) 4 SCC 141] this Court used the terminology ’palliative’ for measuring the damages and the formula of ’adhoc’ was applied. In Sebastian Hongray case [Se bastian M. Hongray v. Union of India, (1984) 3 SCC 82] the expression used by this Court for determining the monetary compensation was ’exemplary’ costs and the formula adopted was ’punitive’. In Bhim Singh case [Bhim Singh v. State of J & K, (1985) 4 SCC 677], the expression used by the Court was ’compensation’ and the method adopted was ’tortious formula’. In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. [(1997) SCC 1 416] the expression used by this Court for determining the compensation was ’monetary compensation’. The formula adopted was ’cost to cost’ method. Courts have not, therefore, adopted a uniform criterion since no statutory formula has been laid down.”
tracted from: Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi v Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association (2011) 14 SCC 481- CLAT PG - 2026
- Constitutional Laws
- It is well recognized that actionable negligence in context of medical profession involves three constituents (i) duty to exercise due care; (ii) breach of duty and (iii) consequential damage. However, a simple lack of care, an error of judgment or an accident is not sufficient proof of negligence on part of the medical professional so long as the doctor follows the acceptable practice of the medical profession in discharge of his duties. He cannot be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative treatment or course of treatment was available or that more skilled doctors were there who could have administered better treatment.
A medical professional may be held liable for negligence only when he is not pos sessed with the requisite qualification or skill or when he fails to exercise reasonable skill which he possesses in giving the treatment. None of the above two essential conditions for establishing negligence stand satisfied in the case at hand as no ev idence was brought on record to prove that Dr. Neeraj Sud had not exercised due diligence, care or skill which he possessed in operating the patient and giving treatment to him. When reasonable care, expected of the medical professional, is extended or rendered to the patient unless contrary is proved, it would not be a case for actionable negligence.
tracted with edits and revisions from Neeraj Sud v Jaswinder Singh 2024 INSC 825- CLAT PG - 2026
- Law of Torts