Eight teenage activists who brought a class action against Environment Minister Sussan Ley have vowed to keep fighting for "climate justice", despite the previous decision in the case being overturned.
Federal Court Justice Mordecai Bromberg when considering fossil fuel projects.
But the full bench of the Federal Court on Tuesday unanimously ruled in favour of an appeal by Ms Ley to reverse the decision.
Lead litigant Anjali Sharma told SBS Hindi she felt "really, really angry" at the court's decision, but "not helpless".
"I'm still feeling really angry that we had to take the federal government to court in the first place, and had to argue for the fact that that duty of care exists in the law in Australian climate law," the 17-year-old said.
"Even though we were knocked back by the court, it doesn't mean that the fight for climate justice stops."
Izzy Raj-Seppings, a 15-year-old involved in the case, told SBS French she was "upset that the people in power aren't doing more to help us in the fight against climate change".
The class action, brought by the teenagers in 2020 on behalf of Australian children and young people, sought to block a proposal by Whitehaven Coal to extend its Vickery coal mine, near Boggabri in NSW.
The expansion of the mine was expected to produce an additional 100 million tonnes of carbon emissions each year — that about a fifth of Australia's total annual emissions.
An emotional Luca Saunders (second from left) outside the NSW Federal Court in Sydney on Tuesday. Source: AAP / DEAN LEWINS/AAPIMAGE
Ms Sharma said she feared the ruling could "open the floodgates to more and more fossil fuel projects".
"I believe that Australia is at a crossroads right now where we can really make a difference for future generations by choosing a safe, clean climate future, powered by renewables, to go forward, or continue to rely on fossil fuel projects that could severely endanger our future and those who are most vulnerable," she said.
Ms Raj-Seppings said the devastating floods in NSW and Queensland showed the federal government needs to take greater action against climate change now.
"Two years ago, Australia was on fire. And today it's underwater. And I think a lot of Australians are realising that this isn't healthy for our country, for our economy, for our people," she said.
"We need climate action so that we can be safe in our environment and live healthily and thrive."
Environmental lawyer Dr Chris McGrath told SBS News that he believed the children were "courageous and ambitious" for bringing the case against the minister in the first place.
"This litigation used a statutory scheme, Australia's national environmental laws, that didn't directly address climate change or human safety. So it was always pushing the boundaries of what the law said on paper," he said.
"It was just remarkable when the trial judge [Justice Bromberg] decided that, in fact, the law, even though it didn't talk about climate change or human safety, that it did actually apply to those things.
"So really the appeal decision, it's really saying, 'Well, the judge jumped beyond the boundaries of what the law allowed.'"
But Dr McGrath said the Federal Court's decision to overturn the earlier ruling shouldn't be seen as the "death knell" for future climate cases.
"The appeal doesn't change the factual findings made by the primary judge — that's Justice Bromberg — about the horrific future that the world faces due to climate change," he said.
"That's an important part of the context, because that factual reality is what's driving a lot of litigation like this, and I think will drive just a tidal wave of litigation in the future."
Dr McGrath said the use of two particular words really stood out to him in Chief Justice Allsop's decision.
"He repeatedly refers to the emissions from this coal mine as 'tiny', and 'not material'," he said.
"That's, I think, the keyword for future litigation against companies like the coal company in this case, Vickery, or against Whitehaven, or against other big climate emitters like AGL.
"Once litigants can establish that they've made a material contribution to the harm, then they can be liable for that."
Equity Generation Lawyers principal David Barnden, who represented the teenagers, told reporters in Sydney on Tuesday that his team would carefully review the Federal Court's decision to determine its next steps.
"The fact remains that carbon emissions from coal mines will create catastrophic risks, including for young people," he said.
"The science has not changed. Irrespective of today's decision, adults should do all they can to create a safe future for our children.
"We will continue to support young people in their fight for a safe future."
The teenagers' legal team has 28 days to apply for special leave to appeal to the High Court.
Dr Chris McGrath told SBS News he thought the case had "a really good chance" of getting special leave to appeal, which is granted on matters "of general importance".
"There are multiple hooks that they can use," he said.
"The Chief Justice himself says that it was a difficult case, and he's taken a different view to the primary judge.
"So the fact that the judges below have really struggled with it and are taking different views ... all of those things go into the mix for whether the High Court grants special leave."
A spokesperson for Sussan Ley told SBS News in a statement that the minister welcomed the Federal Court's decision in the appeal.
It said Ms Ley "always takes her role as the Environment Minister seriously".
"The Morrison Government remains committed to protecting our environment for current and future generations," it said.
"The government will now closely review the judgement."
