15 November 2024
Into Reverse Gear
The recent Hague Court of Appeal judgment, in the appeal brought by Shell against the first instance decision in favour of the NGO Milieudefensie, held that Shell is legally obliged to reduce its scope 3 emissions, but did not order Shell to reduce them by 45%, or indeed any percentage. The judgment is likely to have a significant impact on climate change litigation against corporations beyond just the Netherlands. That impact will be all the greater if the losing parties, Milieudefensie and others, do not appeal. Continue reading >>
0 
15 November 2024
Towards a Bundle of Duties
This week’s decision in Shell v Milieudefensie from the Hague Court of Appeals seemed like a blow to climate litigation: Milieudefensie was ultimately unsuccessful in convincing the Court that it could transpose a global requirement for 45% emissions reductions by 2030 into an obligation for a particular actor. Yet, the Court of Appeals decision marks considerable progress in how we understand the civil liability of large Dutch economic actors for their contributions to climate change. Continue reading >>
0
12 November 2024
Lessons of a Landmark Lost
On 12 November 2024, the Hague Court of Appeal in Shell v Milieudefensie set aside the preceding 2021 judgment which held Shell responsible for its contribution to climate change. The 2021 judgment was widely heralded (though also critiqued) as groundbreaking and a precedent that could be followed elsewhere. While the Appeal judgment is unlikely to receive similar praise from climate activists, it contains important lessons regarding the responsibility of multinational companies for their contributions to climate change. Continue reading >>28 November 2022
Inequality of Harms, Inequality of Arms
On November 8th 2022 Channa Samkalden, lawyer for Esther Kiobel and three other widows of executed Nigerian community leaders, announced that her clients would be ending their lawsuit against Shell. Uncertainty about the outcome, combined with the fact that the case had already been (unsuccessfully) going on for over 20 years in multiple fora, had made the four widows decide to withdraw the appeal, “not without disappointment and frustration”. In this blog, I discuss this case's remarkable procedural history and why it, set against the particular facts of the case, illustrates the fundamental procedural unfairness between large corporations and victims trying to hold them to account. Continue reading >>
0
15 June 2021
The Courts Strike Back
The Shell case, decided by the Hague District Court on 26 May 2021, is part of a growing body of climate cases. What the Shell case does is that it liberates the political-decision maker from the suffocating grip of investor state dispute settlement mechanisms, in particular the mechanism under the Energy Charter Treaty. Continue reading >>15 June 2021
The Power of Open Norms
In a judgement of 26 May, the District Court of the Hague found that Royal Dutch Shell has an “individual responsibility” to limit its carbon emissions by at least 45 percent by 2030. Notable about the ruling is the unwritten standard of care functioning as an open norm, facilitating the accountability of private power. The openness of legal categories not only entails a potential to drive forward social change, but it also implicitly highlights the political role and nature of private law. Continue reading >>09 June 2021
Shell’s Climate Obligation
On 26 May, the District Court of The Hague ruled that the fossil fuels company Royal Dutch Shell needs to reduce its emissions by 45 percent by 2030, compared to 2019. Precisely, the court held Shell responsible for its entire production and supply chain. The ruling will greatly advance the implementation of Article 2 of the Paris Agreement and climate-related human rights. Continue reading >>
0
28 May 2021
Shell’s Responsibility for Climate Change
On 26 May 2021, the District Court of the Hague rendered a judgment in the case Milieudefensie v Royal Dutch Shell that can rightly be called revolutionary. This is the first judgment of its kind in which a multinational corporation is held responsible, in part based on international law, for its contribution to climate change. Continue reading >>
0