On 15 July 2025 in Cairns, the Federal Court accepted the factual case presented in Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul’s landmark Australian Climate Case but found that “the law does not currently support” their claim that the government has a legal duty of care to protect the Torres Strait, its people and their culture from climate harm.

The Federal Court found that while the Torres Strait Islands, people and culture are being “ravaged by human induced climate change” and that climate change poses “an existential threat to the whole of humanity”, the Australian Government does not “currently” have a legal duty of care to protect Torres Strait people from climate harm.

His Honour said that “when the Commonwealth identified and set Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets in 2015, 2020 and 2021, it failed to engage with or give any real or genuine consideration to what the best available science indicated was required for Australia to play its part in the critically important global objective, enshrined in the Paris Agreement, of significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions and thereby moderating global warming and reducing the prospects of the worst and most dangerous impacts of climate change.”

His Honour noted that “In short, the evidence revealed that when it set Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions targets in those three years, the Commonwealth paid scant if any regard to the best available science.”

Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul are global trailblazers for climate justice and accountability. This case has already had enormous success, it has dragged the Australian Government on country and forced it to face up to the truth of the harm they are actively and knowingly causing to Australian communities. They were forced to admit in open court that they failed to consider climate science or the harm they’re perpetuating against Australian communities in setting its climate targets.

Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul are committed to seeing this case through to the end for their communities and will now sit with their legal team and carefully examine pathways for appeal. Appeal aside, Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul have already achieved the extraordinary by bringing this case and taking a critical step to holding the Australian government accountable to the law and stopping climate harm.

The case uncovered that the Australian Government set climate targets without regard to the science, or to what would prevent climate catastrophe affecting Torres Strait communities.
In the proceedings Justice Wigney asked the Commonwealth, “In some respects … your case is that it would be open to the Commonwealth Government to set [an emissions reduction] target which completely ignores the climate science and that it would not be held accountable by the law of negligence?” and Stephen Lloyd SC acting for the government, responded, “Absolutely”.

The Australian Government has an emissions reduction target of 43% by 2030 (on 2005 levels), which has been roundly criticised by climate experts, with the Climate Council recommending 75% by 2030.

Australia is the third largest exporter of fossil fuels globally after Russia and the United States. Resisting global pressure and advice from experts, the Australian Government, led by the Australian Labor party, has approved 27 fossil fuel projects and expansions since taking office.

Uncle Pabai Pabai said:

“We are cultural people, our ancestors, I’ve got a 2 year old son, he’s my main focus – this is why I’m doing this. For the love of my son and for all the people in our community in the Torres Strait, for the bushfire and flood survivors, the farmers, kids and grandkids. I’ll keep fighting and will sit down with my lawyers and look at how we can appeal”

Uncle Paul Kabai said:

“Mr Albanese and his expensive government lawyers, will stand up and walk away just like they walk out the door of this court today. They go home and sleep soundly in their expensive beds. We go back to our islands and the deepest pain imaginable.

I want to ask Mr Albanese what I should say when I go home to my family, how do I tell them we have less than 30 years left?”

“I can feel the moral burden on my shoulders. Sometimes when I’m alone I feel the heaviness of the burden and it is not mine to carry. The prime minister should be carrying this for the people that’s his job.”

Aunty McRose Elu, Saibai Elder said:

“We will cry together and we will rise because unlike the Prime Minister, this isn’t a fancy job that one day he will walk away from – it’s our lives, our children’s futures, it’s everything we have. You come to our islands, you talk to us about climate change and then you leave and approve more fossil fuel projects.”

“Whether or not people like Mr Albanense want to admit it, they have a duty of care to all of us. Prime Minister Albanese and his and his Minister’s weakness and refusal to accept this through this legal process is a damning moral loss. They should all be ashamed.”

“Since the decision, I heard that Minister Bowen has already said he understands the impacts of climate change and he thinks the government is delivering. I say he’s a liar. Come and sit with me on Saibai and look those kids in the eyes, and you tell them that your government is doing enough when they have 30 years left on their islands. Your government just approved an extension of another massive fossil fuel project in WA that will drown us. Stop lying to us.”

Isabelle Reinecke, founder and Executive Director of Grata Fund, said:

“In May the Australian Government approved a 40 year extension to the Woodside North West Shelf Gas project which will release 4.4 billion tonnes of climate pollution over its lifetime – it will be responsible for emissions greater than dozens of countries and many of the world’s biggest companies.”

“The court was not yet ready to take the step we all need it to and hold the Australian Government accountable for it’s role in creating the climate crisis. However, the court made extraordinarily strong factual fi ndings in agreement with Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul, including that the Australian Government knows that Torres Strait communities are being ravaged by climate change and had “scant if any regard” to climate science in setting emissions reduction targets. The government is continuing to make choices, open-eyed, to prioritise the vested interests of fossil fuel companies and political donations over the people it is supposed to serve.”

“The government didn’t see this case coming and they never thought people would have the determination and bravery to see it through. By bringing this case and seeing it through, the Uncles have rattled the major political parties and Australian government that think they can continue to fuel the climate crisis with impunity. Our communities will continue to fight back through the courts, and the streets, and the halls of power until we win a future where our communities are cared for.”

Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul’s case has brought to light a series of significant legal questions, and a win on any of these matters is an historic victory. They will consider grounds for appeal on the other issues with their legal team.

Brett Spiegel, Principal Lawyer, Phi Finney McDonald, said:

“Today His Honour found that Uncle Pabai, Uncle Paul and Torres Strait Islanders face an existential crisis. He accepted the testimony of Uncle Pabai, Uncle Paul and the other Torres Strait fact witnesses about the harm to their homes and to Ailan Kastom from climate change. He also found that the Commonwealth government set emissions targets that did not “give real or genuine consideration to the best available science.” Nevertheless, His Honour found that as a trial court judge, it wasn’t “currently” open him to fi nd that the government owed a duty of care to Torres Strait Islanders. We will review the judgment with Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul and consider all options for appeal.”

DECISION SUMMARY

In the case Pabai Pabai & Anor v Commonwealth of Australia, the Federal Court found that while the Torres Strait Islands, people and culture are being “ravaged by human induced climate change” and that climate change poses “an existential threat to the whole of humanity”, the Australian Government does not have a legal duty of care to protect Torres Strait people from climate harm.

Justice Wigney found that Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul and their community proved the severe climate change harms being experienced on the Torres Strait Islands, the particular vulnerability of Torres Strait Islanders to the impacts of climate change and the inadequacy of the Australian Government’s emissions reduction targets set in 2015, 2020 and 2021.

Justice Wigney noted, “The Torres Strait Islanders are, both literally and fi guratively, a world away from Canberra, the home of the Commonwealth Parliament. That is where many of the most important decisions are made about the nation’s response to climate change and its impacts. While there may have been, and perhaps still are, some climate change doubters and deniers among the politicians and bureaucrats who are responsible for making those decisions, it is tolerably clear that the Commonwealth Government has for some time known about the perils of, and ongoing risks posed by, climate change.”

Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul had argued that loss of culture, or Ailan Kastom should be compensable. Justice Wigney, while having considerable sympathy for this argument found that the law in Australia currently does not recognise loss of culture as compensable.

Justice Wigney noted that Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul succeeded in proving many of the factual aspects of their claim, including the scientific evidence about the devastating impacts that human-induced climate change has had, and continues to have, on the Torres Strait and Torres Strait Islanders, and their way of life.

In his judgment summary, Justice Wigney observed, “The projected future impacts of climate change in the Torres Strait Islands also paint a very bleak picture indeed. The Torres Strait Islands and their traditional inhabitants are quite literally at the very frontline of climate change and its devastating impacts. Unless something is done to arrest global warming and the resulting escalating impacts of climate change, there is a very real risk that the applicants’ worst fears will be realised and they will lose their islands, their culture and their way of life and will become, as it were, climate refugees. That would, of course, be a devastating outcome.”

Justice Wigney found that when the Commonwealth set Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets in 2015, 2020 and 2021, the government failed to engage with or give any real or genuine consideration to what the best available science indicated was required for Australia to play its part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the most dangerous impacts of climate change. Justice Wigney found that the targets set by the government in those years were not based on, and were not consistent with, what the science said about the size of the emissions reduction that would be necessary for Australia to play its part in meeting the global objective of keeping global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement.

The Federal Court found that the Government does not owe a duty of care to Torres Strait Islanders in relation to mitigating climate harms or providing funding for adaptation measures on the Torres Strait Islands. Justice Wigney noted that the law of negligence in Australia did not allow him to fi nd a duty of care was owed by the Government, or was breached.

Uncle Pabai, Uncle Paul, their communities and their legal team will now closely read the judgment and consider whether to lodge an appeal.

Link to summary and full judgment below:

  1. Summary
  2. Full Judgment