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
© 2025 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 All'Headaches,' Opportunities Ahead for Corporate and Trade Lawyers Advising Foreign Businesses
4 minute readSimmons & Simmons Make Waves with 'Legal Personhood' Initiative for Whales
2 minute readLeigh Day Cleared of Wrongdoing in £55M Shell Settlement with Nigeria
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Who Is Nicholas J. Ganjei? His Rise to Top Lawyer
- 2Delaware Supreme Court Names Civil Litigator to Serve as New Chief Disciplinary Counsel
- 3Inside Track: Why Relentless Self-Promoters Need Not Apply for GC Posts
- 4Fresh lawsuit hits Oregon city at the heart of Supreme Court ruling on homeless encampments
- 5Ex-Kline & Specter Associate Drops Lawsuit Against the Firm
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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