In a Dutch court hearing on Friday, Shell argued that a recent European climate ruling against the Swiss government provided backing for their appeal against a 2021 Dutch climate ruling. Shell emphasized that the European ruling affirmed the principle that states, rather than courts, should be responsible for establishing regulations pertaining to emissions reductions. This assertion is central to Shell’s challenge against the 2021 Dutch ruling, which mandated a 45% reduction in the company’s carbon emissions by 2030, encompassing emissions generated by its products’ buyers and users worldwide.
Conversely, Friends of the Earth Netherlands, the organization that initiated the original case against Shell, presented an opposing interpretation. They contended that the European Court of Human Rights’ decision supported their stance, highlighting the court’s affirmation of climate change as a human rights issue and the role of courts in ensuring corporate compliance with human rights standards.
The ongoing dispute underscores the divergent perspectives on the allocation of responsibility for addressing climate-related challenges, particularly in relation to emissions reduction targets and corporate accountability. The outcome of this case, scheduled for November 12, 2024, is poised to have significant implications for the legal landscape surrounding environmental governance and corporate environmental obligations.