Historic victory: Court rules against Shell in landmark climate case
On Wednesday 26 May 2021, in a groundbreaking legal decision, a Dutch court ruled that Shell must drastically reduce its CO₂ emissions, marking a historic victory for climate justice. This landmark case, joined by over 17,000 co-claimants, sets a powerful precedent for holding fossil fuel corporations accountable for their role in climate change, reinforcing the urgent need for corporate responsibility.
As Donald Pols, director of Milieudefensie, puts it: “This is a tremendous victory for our climate, for the millions of people around the world threatened by dangerous climate change. A victory for generations to come. A giant leap forward for a safe and healthy Earth.”
A legal turning point: Shell ordered to cut emissions
The District Court of The Hague delivered a historic verdict in May 2021: Shell must reduce its CO₂ emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels.
The case, filed by Milieudefensie in collaboration with ActionAid Netherlands, BothEnds, Fossielvrij NL, Jongeren Milieu Actief, Waddenvereniging and Greenpeace, acknowledged the responsibility of transnational corporations like Shell in the climate crisis.
Roger Cox, lawyer for Milieudefensie, declared: “This is a turning point in history. This case is unique because it is the first time a judge has ordered a large polluting company to comply with the Paris Climate Agreement. This ruling may also have major consequences for other big polluters.” Eventually, Shell decided to file an appeal.
Why this ruling is a landmark in the fight for climate justice
2024 appeal court decision in the case against Shell has reshaped the legal landscape. While the court overturned key aspects of the historic 2021 ruling, its judgment also reinforced critical principles that will fuel our fight for climate justice. Far from a setback, this ruling has handed us powerful legal tools to hold Shell and other fossil fuel giants accountable.
1. Protection from climate change is a fundamental human right. The court affirmed that every person has the right to be protected from dangerous climate change. The judgement by the court strengthens legal arguments against polluting corporations worldwide by setting a legal precedent.
2. Transnational Corporations like Shell have a duty to prevent climate harm. The court recognised that big polluting transnational corporations have a duty to combat dangerous climate change. Shell’s failure to act would violate human rights, setting a legal precedent for other fossil fuel companies.
3. Shell must make an adequate contribution to the Paris Agreement goals. Despite not being a signatory to the Paris Agreement, Shell’s massive carbon footprint and contribution to climate change mean it must contribute to global climate goals.
4. Shell’s expansion plans are incompatible with climate goals. Shell’s 700 new oil and gas fields, locations where oil or gas is present underground, where investment has not yet been made or decided, directly contradict the Paris Agreement. The court’s acknowledgement of this inconsistency provides a strong legal basis for future challenges against fossil fuel expansion.
5. Shell and other polluting corporations have the power—and obligation—to reduce their emissions. Shell can no longer claim that market demand forces it to continue fossil fuel extraction. The court ruled that dangerous climate change can only be prevented if not only the demand for oil and gas shrinks, but also its supply. This means that Shell must actively reduce its supply of oil and gas.
The power of collective action: How we won against Shell
The victory against Shell was not just a legal triumph—it is a movement built on public pressure, strategic litigation and relentless activism.
From the beginning, Milieudefensie ensured the case had broad public backing. By partnering with multiple NGOs and inviting thousands of individuals to join as co-claimants, the lawsuit became a national and international symbol of climate resistance. The case was eventually joined by 17,379 private individuals, sending a strong signal to polluting companies that they are under scrutiny by the public. Their wrongdoings are no longer ignored.
Shaping public opinion has been instrumental as well. It shifted dramatically over the course of the legal battle. Initially met with scepticism, the case gained overwhelming support as media coverage highlighted Shell’s role in climate destruction. Major newspapers, including Al Jazeera, Bloomberg, Reuters and Trouw, recognised the lawsuit as a necessary step toward climate justice. This support from the media both reveals the change in public consciousness around climate justice and accompanies the urge of citizens for comprehensive climate action.
This case is the result of years of preparation, including preparing a solid legal case and an impactful communications strategy while securing funding.
The Shell climate case represents a historic legal breakthrough, demonstrating that even the most powerful corporations can be held accountable for their role in the climate crisis. Now the movement grows stronger. The demand is clear: No more fossil fuel expansion. No more corporate impunity. The time for climate action is now.
