Shell Prevails in Dutch Climate Case After Switching Counsel
The case was filed by several Dutch NGOs and handled by Paulussen Advocaten's Roger Cox, one of the country’s best-known and most influential climate lawyers.
November 12, 2024 at 02:49 PM
2 minute read
In a decision that could have implications for climate litigation, Dutch oil giant Shell on Tuesday won an appeal of a ruling that required it to accelerate carbon reduction efforts.
The case before the Hague Court of Appeal centered on a landmark 2019 Dutch court ruling compelling Shell to reduce its global greenhouse gas emissions by 45% compared to 2019 levels in what was believed to be the first time a company had been ordered by judges to slash emissions in line with the 2016 Paris climate agreement.
In Tuesday's ruling, the three appellate court judges wrote that the oil giant must reduce its emissions under the country’s civil-code duty of care, but that Shell cannot be held to an emissions reduction goal of 45%, or any other target, due to a lack of scientific consensus on the appropriate emissions reduction targets for oil and gas companies.
“This means that based on the available climate science, it cannot be said that a 45% reduction obligation—or any other percentage—applies to Shell,” the judges wrote.
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek's Dennis Horeman had represented the Shell when the 2019 ruling was issued. But in the appeal, Clifford Chance’s Daan Lunsingh Scheurleer advised the oil giant. Shell declined to comment and Clifford Chance did not respond to a request for comment.
The decision can still be appealed before the country’s Supreme Court.
The case was filed by several Dutch NGOs and handled by Paulussen Advocaten's Roger Cox, one the country’s best-known and most influential climate lawyers.
Tuesday also marked the first day of hearings in another consequential Dutch climate case.
Greenpeace butted heads with the Dutch government before the Court of the Hague in a challenge brought by the environmental NGO over the measures the government has implemented to reduce nitrogen emissions. Greenpeace argued that the Dutch government has violated its obligation under European Bird and Habitats Directives to avoid nitrogen-induced deterioration of the Netherlands’ most vulnerable natural areas.
Greenpeace is being advised by Dutch independent firm Prakken d’Oliveira, while Dutch independent firm Pels Rijcken is representing the Dutch government.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Related Stories
View AllYou Might Like
View AllSimmons & Simmons Make Waves with 'Legal Personhood' Initiative for Whales
2 minute readLeigh Day Cleared of Wrongdoing in £55M Shell Settlement with Nigeria
2 minute readLondon Trial Against BHP for Role in Brazil Mining Disaster Begins
Trending Stories
- 1Lawyer’s Resolutions: Focusing on 2025
- 2Houston Judge Exonerated on Appeal, Public Reprimand Vacated
- 3Bar Report - Dec. 30
- 4Employment Law Developments to Expect From the Second Trump Administration
- 5How I Made Law Firm Leadership: 'It’s Imperative That You Never Stop Learning,' Says Ian Ribald of Ballard Spahr
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250