This is the Guardian. Today's rulings made very clear that the European states have a legal responsibility to take real climate action and to protect people and to protect its

its citizens.

This week the European Court of Human Rights made a landmark ruling.

The key aspect of the case hinged on the facts which scientists have well established that older

women are more likely to die in heat waves and so they're disproportionately hit by weak climate

policy. The case was brought by a group of older Swiss women who claimed that Switzerland wasn't doing enough to cut emissions, putting their lives at risk.

Switzerland, like every country in the world, there a signatory of the Paris Agreement on climate change.

They made promise after promise to try and limit the planet from heating 1.5 degrees

Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures by the end of the century.

That 1.5 degrees C target is the key indicator when global heating really hits very very dangerous levels.

The court found that Switzerland's climate policies had violated the plaintiff's

fundamental human rights, opening up a path for future cases.

If any activists group want to put more pressure on their governments to honor their promises

to keep the planet from eating 1.5 degree Celsius, they can effectively just follow what the Swiss senior citizens have done.

So today we're hearing more about how this case came about,

what it could mean for activists and governments around the world,

and what happens next.

I'm the Guardian's science editor Ian Sample and this is Science Weekly.

Agit Narangent, you're the Guardians Europe Environment Correspondent.

And before we dig into this landmark climate case from the European Court of Human Rights,

I'd love to know more about the backstory. You've actually spent time

with some of these women involved and you went on a hike with them. Tell me about that.

...