ABSTRACT
The appellate judgment in Milieudefensie v ShelL reaffirms the corporate duty to mitigate climate change under Dutch tort law. However, the Court of Appeal overturned the lower court’s imposition of an absolute 45% emissions reduction target by 2030, deeming it inappropriate. This decision provides two key lessons for future litigation. First, while the court avoided ruling on the legality of Shell’s investments in new oil and gas fields, it acknowledged potential conflicts between such investments and the corporate duty to mitigate climate change, suggesting this could form the basis of future claims. Second, although the court recognized a duty to reduce scope 3 emissions, it found the evidence insufficient to substantiate specific reductions, leaving room for future cases supported by stronger scientific evidence. The judgment highlights the growing importance of EU corporate legislation, notably the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, which mandates climate transition plans aligned with the Paris Agreement. Future lawsuits may centre on the adequacy and implementation of these plans, expanding corporate climate litigation beyond emissions targets.
Moreno-Cervera de la Cuesta, Paula and Aránguez Díaz, Pedro, Forging the Corporate Duty to Mitigate Climate Change: Milieudefensie v Shell (September 9, 2025).
Leave a Reply