Dutch court rules that Shell must increase emissions reductions by 2030
A Dutch court has today ruled that oil giant Shell must reduce emissions by more than it had planned by 2030, in what could be a landmark ruling for the industry.
Judges at a lower court in the Hague said that the Anglo-Dutch firm was legally obliged to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 45 per cent by 2030 from 2019 levels.
Shell currently has a target to reduce the carbon intensity of its products by 20 per cent by 2030, by 45 per cent by 2035 and by 100 per cent by 2050 compared with 2016.
The firm said that it expected to appeal the decision.
The case against the oil firm was brought by Milieudefensie, the Dutch arm of Friends of the Earth.
They argued that Shell’s continued investment in oil and gas posed a threat to human rights.
Although the judgement is legally binding only in the Netherlands, it could set a precedent for similar challenges in different jurisdictions.
Donald Pols, director of Friends of the Earth Netherlands, said: “This is a monumental victory for our planet, for our children and a big leap towards a livable future for everyone.
“The judge has left no room for doubt: Shell is causing dangerous climate change and must stop its destructive behaviour now.”
A Shell spokesperson said: “Urgent action is needed on climate change which is why we have accelerated our efforts to become a net-zero emissions energy company by 2050, in step with society, with short-term targets to track our progress.
“We are investing billions of dollars in low-carbon energy, including electric vehicle charging, hydrogen, renewables and biofuels. We want to grow demand for these products and scale up our new energy businesses even more quickly.
“We will continue to focus on these efforts and fully expect to appeal today’s disappointing court decision.”
Tom Cummins, dispute resolution partner at law firm Ashurst, commented:
“This is arguably the most significant climate change related judgment yet, which emphasises that companies and not just governments may be the target of strategic litigation which seeks to drive changes in behaviour.
“Oil and gas companies will be scrutinising the judgment, as will pressure groups and claimant lawyers to see whether there is scope for similar claims to be brought against other companies in other jurisdictions.”
The verdict comes shortly after a number of shareholders voted against Shells’ climate strategy at its recent AGM.
Over 11 per cent of investors voted against the advisory motion, while more than 30 per cent voted for an alternative motion proposed by campaigners Follow This.
The proposal asked Shell to commit to targets aligned with the 2015 Paris Agreement and for the energy giant to shift its investments towards renewables.
Under UK company law, the firm will now have to discuss the proposal with shareholders.