SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
"This is a particular unique case because what we are seeking here is a prevention of future climate harm, instead of looking for financial compensation for loses that have already occurred," said attorney Roger Cox.
(Photo: WildEarth Guardians/flickr/cc)
To Stop Shell From Pulling 'World Into the Abyss,' Climate Groups Deliver Groundbreaking Summons
Case seeks prevention of future climate harm
Apr 05, 2019
A coalition of environmental groups issued Shell a court summons Friday demanding the company shift course from its fossil fuel business model and act on its responsibility to stop fueling the climate crisis.
The legal fight is "not only to protect present generations but also to protect future generations," according to the document (pdf).
"Shell's directors still do not want to say goodbye to oil and gas," Donald Pols, director of Friends of the Earth Netherlands, said in a statement. "They would pull the world into the abyss. The judge can prevent this from happening."
The document waas delivered to Shell's international headquarters in the Hague, with Friends of the Earth Netherlands, ActionAid NL, Both ENDS, Fossielvrij NL, Greenpeace NL, Young Friends of the Earth NL, and Waddenvereniging acting as co-plaintiffs. It starts legal processing against the company after it brushed off (pdf) a notice of liability last year.
The summons calls for the fossil fuel giant to appear in the District Court of The Hague on April 17, 2019.
Speaking about the case to Friends of the Earth's Real World Radio, Roger Cox, the lawyer representing the co-plaintiffs, explained its groundbreaking nature.
"This is a particular unique case because what we are seeking here is a prevention of future climate harm, instead of looking for financial compensation for loses that have already occurred," he said.
The summons says that the company is making "substantial" contributions towards global carbon emissions, continues to pursue fossil fuels despite knowing their contribution to the climate crisis, and has an obligation under Dutch law to act on the Paris climate goals.
Cox told RWR that "we also feel that the time is now to make these changes and use the law as an instrument to accelerate the energy transition and to achieve the Paris goal."
While the case has a lofty goal, "we do feel that we can win," he said. As he explained in a statement, this could have far-reaching effects.
"If successful, the uniqueness of the case would be that Shell, as one of the largest multinational corporations in the world, would be legally obligated to change its business operations. We also expect that this would have an effect on other fossil fuel companies, raising the pressure on them to change."
That change can't come fast enough, added Carroll Muffett, president of the Center for International Environmental Law.
"Today's suit against Shell sends a clear signal that business as usual is no longer acceptable."
--Carroll Muffett, Center for International Environmental Law.
"The IPCC has warned that window of action for avoiding irreversible and truly catastrophic climate harms is narrow and closing rapidly. Today's suit against Shell sends a clear signal that business as usual is no longer acceptable. Companies that continue ignoring climate risks can and will be held legally accountable and financially responsible for their actions."
"Investors and corporate decision-makers who ignore this new reality," she said, "do so at their peril."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A coalition of environmental groups issued Shell a court summons Friday demanding the company shift course from its fossil fuel business model and act on its responsibility to stop fueling the climate crisis.
The legal fight is "not only to protect present generations but also to protect future generations," according to the document (pdf).
"Shell's directors still do not want to say goodbye to oil and gas," Donald Pols, director of Friends of the Earth Netherlands, said in a statement. "They would pull the world into the abyss. The judge can prevent this from happening."
The document waas delivered to Shell's international headquarters in the Hague, with Friends of the Earth Netherlands, ActionAid NL, Both ENDS, Fossielvrij NL, Greenpeace NL, Young Friends of the Earth NL, and Waddenvereniging acting as co-plaintiffs. It starts legal processing against the company after it brushed off (pdf) a notice of liability last year.
The summons calls for the fossil fuel giant to appear in the District Court of The Hague on April 17, 2019.
Speaking about the case to Friends of the Earth's Real World Radio, Roger Cox, the lawyer representing the co-plaintiffs, explained its groundbreaking nature.
"This is a particular unique case because what we are seeking here is a prevention of future climate harm, instead of looking for financial compensation for loses that have already occurred," he said.
The summons says that the company is making "substantial" contributions towards global carbon emissions, continues to pursue fossil fuels despite knowing their contribution to the climate crisis, and has an obligation under Dutch law to act on the Paris climate goals.
Cox told RWR that "we also feel that the time is now to make these changes and use the law as an instrument to accelerate the energy transition and to achieve the Paris goal."
While the case has a lofty goal, "we do feel that we can win," he said. As he explained in a statement, this could have far-reaching effects.
"If successful, the uniqueness of the case would be that Shell, as one of the largest multinational corporations in the world, would be legally obligated to change its business operations. We also expect that this would have an effect on other fossil fuel companies, raising the pressure on them to change."
That change can't come fast enough, added Carroll Muffett, president of the Center for International Environmental Law.
"Today's suit against Shell sends a clear signal that business as usual is no longer acceptable."
--Carroll Muffett, Center for International Environmental Law.
"The IPCC has warned that window of action for avoiding irreversible and truly catastrophic climate harms is narrow and closing rapidly. Today's suit against Shell sends a clear signal that business as usual is no longer acceptable. Companies that continue ignoring climate risks can and will be held legally accountable and financially responsible for their actions."
"Investors and corporate decision-makers who ignore this new reality," she said, "do so at their peril."
A coalition of environmental groups issued Shell a court summons Friday demanding the company shift course from its fossil fuel business model and act on its responsibility to stop fueling the climate crisis.
The legal fight is "not only to protect present generations but also to protect future generations," according to the document (pdf).
"Shell's directors still do not want to say goodbye to oil and gas," Donald Pols, director of Friends of the Earth Netherlands, said in a statement. "They would pull the world into the abyss. The judge can prevent this from happening."
The document waas delivered to Shell's international headquarters in the Hague, with Friends of the Earth Netherlands, ActionAid NL, Both ENDS, Fossielvrij NL, Greenpeace NL, Young Friends of the Earth NL, and Waddenvereniging acting as co-plaintiffs. It starts legal processing against the company after it brushed off (pdf) a notice of liability last year.
The summons calls for the fossil fuel giant to appear in the District Court of The Hague on April 17, 2019.
Speaking about the case to Friends of the Earth's Real World Radio, Roger Cox, the lawyer representing the co-plaintiffs, explained its groundbreaking nature.
"This is a particular unique case because what we are seeking here is a prevention of future climate harm, instead of looking for financial compensation for loses that have already occurred," he said.
The summons says that the company is making "substantial" contributions towards global carbon emissions, continues to pursue fossil fuels despite knowing their contribution to the climate crisis, and has an obligation under Dutch law to act on the Paris climate goals.
Cox told RWR that "we also feel that the time is now to make these changes and use the law as an instrument to accelerate the energy transition and to achieve the Paris goal."
While the case has a lofty goal, "we do feel that we can win," he said. As he explained in a statement, this could have far-reaching effects.
"If successful, the uniqueness of the case would be that Shell, as one of the largest multinational corporations in the world, would be legally obligated to change its business operations. We also expect that this would have an effect on other fossil fuel companies, raising the pressure on them to change."
That change can't come fast enough, added Carroll Muffett, president of the Center for International Environmental Law.
"Today's suit against Shell sends a clear signal that business as usual is no longer acceptable."
--Carroll Muffett, Center for International Environmental Law.
"The IPCC has warned that window of action for avoiding irreversible and truly catastrophic climate harms is narrow and closing rapidly. Today's suit against Shell sends a clear signal that business as usual is no longer acceptable. Companies that continue ignoring climate risks can and will be held legally accountable and financially responsible for their actions."
"Investors and corporate decision-makers who ignore this new reality," she said, "do so at their peril."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.