Abstract
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>This chapter examines China’s Green Principle in addressing gaps in climate legislation, particularly within civil law. The Green Principle in Article 9 of the Civil Code mandates that civil activities promote resource conservation and ecological protection, integrating environmental public law values into private law. This open-ended provision has been applied in carbon-related civil disputes, including contract, property, and tort cases, fulfilling roles such as declaratory actions, normative interpretation, or filling legal gaps when clear provisions are lacking, thereby facilitating the low-carbon transition. However, the use of open norms like the Green Principle poses challenges in ensuring consistency and stability in judicial decisions. These norms provide courts with flexibility but raise concerns about judicial discretion and inconsistent rulings. This chapter analyses judicial decisions in cases involving charging pile (i.e., electric vehicle charging station) installations and Bitcoin mining contracts to evaluate the Green Principle’s effectiveness in climate change mitigation. It emphasises that open norms must align with legislative intent and be of advisory nature and should be not interpreted in a prohibitive fashion. To ensure fairness and consistency, the chapter suggests issuing judicial interpretative documents to clarify the scope and application of the Green Principle, minimising risks of arbitrary rulings and enhancing judicial credibility.</jats:p>