Why would a judgment in Australia matter to investors? It was a ruling to prevent a coal mining company from expanding, but part of the decision was based on global warming. The court for the first time anywhere said it using global warming as a reason to prevent the owner to expand a mining project.
This could be precedent setting and have wider implications than just on mining. What if the argument is made against infrastructure projects, such as road building, bridge reconstruction or for that matter any major upgrade or building project anywhere.
For investors it is a factor to consider for the future when investing in companies that build, mine or support large scale projects that could impact greenhouse emissions. It could also prevent car companies from building new factories or for that matter any factory that might impact greenhouse emissions.
Something to consider when investing.