Richard Lord, a commercial litigator and observer of Oxfam's mock climate tribunal, stated that insurance companies have the potential to encourage more environmentally friendly behavior. Lord, who specializes in insurance claims and has over 20 years of experience, believes that industries are ahead of governments when it comes to addressing climate change. He emphasized that industries are more aware of climate change and have taken more responsible actions, driven by pressure from their shareholders. Activists and regulators are both putting pressure on insurance companies, who are taking the issue very seriously according to Lord, a lawyer at Brick Court Chambers in London. His recent work settling claims for Hurricane Katrina victims has shown him that insurance companies are fully aware of the risks they face. Lord stated that insurance companies are actively interested in comprehending the risks associated with climate change and litigation in order to fully grasp the consequences. For example, if a homeowner faces increased premiums for insuring a house in a flood-prone area, they are more likely to question the reasoning behind it. Lord explained that insurers gather detailed information to better understand risks, which in turn affects people's behavior. He also pointed out that the insurance industry, being larger than oil, gas, or other traditionally large sectors, could wield significant influence globally. "In fact, it is the economic power of insurers that truly supports a substantial portion of commercial activity." The commercial litigator who came to observe the tribunal was hesitant to comment on the issue due to his lack of familiarity with Bangladesh laws. He emphasized that he was not an environmental or human rights lawyer, noting that litigation was a somewhat blunt tool to address climate change. However, he acknowledged that as the problem worsens and the consequences are not recognized by many, people will find different ways to address climate change. He found it interesting that atmospheric trust litigation, which he described as still in its infancy, applies ancient principles traditionally used for natural assets like water to assets of fundamental importance to society as a whole. However, Lord stated that he was not aware of any cases of climate litigation. He noted that many countries include the right to a clean environment in their constitutions either directly or indirectly through human rights or general rights. Lord also mentioned that while the issues in Bangladesh are emotionally moving, they lack compelling evidence based on scientific research to establish cause and effect. Therefore, the litigator explained that transitioning from a mock tribunal to a real tribunal raises complex issues. He stated that the hypothetical defendant, such as the Bangladesh government, could argue that they are already taking significant steps to combat climate change by pointing out their low carbon footprint of 200 kilograms per person compared to 8600 kilograms for each British citizen. Conversely, in a legal dispute between nations, the hypothetical defendant, likely a developed country, could deny any historical responsibility by claiming their development mirrors that of Bangladesh. He expressed uncertainty about the possibility of Bangladesh authorities suing a country like the United States. This uncertainty has led people to address the issue indirectly by blocking permits, seeking injunctions, or demanding environmental impact assessments for certain entities, which can also lead to positive changes.