\n<\/p>\n
Oil giant Shell has won a landmark case in the Dutch courts, overturning an earlier ruling requiring it to cuts its carbon emissions by 45%.<\/p>\n
The Hague court of appeal said it could not establish that Shell had a “social standard of care” to reduce its emissions by 45% or any other amount, even though it agreed the company had an obligation to citizens to limit emissions.<\/p>\n
Three years ago, a court in The Hague backed a case by Friends of the Earth and 17,000 Dutch citizens requiring Shell to reduce its CO2 emissions significantly, in line with the Paris climate accords.<\/p>\n
The ruling came as climate talks involving some 200 countries got under way in Azerbaijan.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Environmental groups can now take their case against Shell to the Supreme Court – meaning that a final verdict in this far-reaching case may still be years away.<\/p>\n
At the time, the 2021 ruling marked the first time a court had ordered a private company to align its workings with the Paris climate agreement, meaning that it was not sufficient for a company simply to comply with the law – it had to comply with global climate policy too.<\/p>\n
Under the terms of the Paris Agreement on climate change, nearly 200 nations agreed to keep global temperatures “well below” 2C above pre-industrial levels.<\/p>\n
The appeals court judge said that companies such as Shell were obliged to contribute to combating climate change based on the human right to protection against dangerous climate change.<\/p>\n
However, the court said Shell was already working to reduce its emissions and the court could not establish whether it should make a 45% cut or another percentage, as there was no current accepted agreement in climate science on the required amount.<\/p>\n
Shell has argued that it is already taking “serious steps to reduce emissions”. It complained the original ruling was unfair as it singled out one company for a global issue, and said it was unrealistic to try to hold Shell accountable for its customers’ choices.<\/p>\n
Shell said if people considered progress was too slow towards cutting emissions then they should lobby governments rather than Shell to change policies and bring about a green transition.<\/p>\n
The oil firm says its aim is to reduce the carbon intensity of products it sells by 15-20% by 2030 from a 2016 baseline. Shell also aims to become a “net zero” emissions company by 2050.<\/p>\n
Part of the historic legal case hinged on the interpretation of an “unwritten duty of care” that exists under Dutch law, which requires companies to prevent hazardous negligence.<\/p>\n
Friends of the Earth Netherlands argued that there was an international consensus that human rights offered protection against dangerous climate change and that companies had to respect human rights.<\/p>\n
Shell’s successful appeal could have far-reaching implications for corporate climate responsibility.<\/p>\n
A number of environmental groups around the world are now trying to force companies and governments to comply with the accords through the courts.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n