What are the legal implications of the words “takes note of…” in the Copenhagen Accord? The Accord itself is a non-legally binding agreement. As between the parties that agreed it (or subsequently associated themselves with it), it is likely, if anything, to be politically binding. This means that political consequences could flow from its …

Does ‘taking note’ have the same legal status as ‘adoption‘ (as it was referred by a UN policy rep in session)?  “Adoption” and “taking note” cannot have the same legal status (otherwise, you would not go for the latter, having failed to achieve the former – Parties are not so ignorant that they …

What is the meaning of “Protocol or another legal instrument” and “applicable to all Parties” in the text below? more specifically:  1. “Protocol or another legal instrument”: is it right that the second part does not give any guarantee for a legally binding instrument, since legal instrument can also mean COP decision? 2. “applicable …

Under the UNFCCC, are the terms “Developed” and “Developing” defined anywhere?  No, there are no definitions. However, there are subtle indications of what is intended by the term “developed” by the inclusion of those parties that are “undergoing the process of transition to a market economy” in Annex …

1. Can you confirm the interpretation that committees are in fact SBs for the purpose of Art 7.2? If this is the case, how do they differ from the more familiar subsidiary bodies: SBI and SBSTA? 2. Does this mean that there is no automatic hierarchy of ‘committees’ as sitting beneath SBSTA and SBI except […]