Energie 2-min

Climate Litigation

Climate litigation constitutes a growing legal field with increasing (inter)national attention. These proceedings play an essential role in enforcing climate responsibility on governments and companies. Do you want to make your company more sustainable, for example to comply with climate legislation or because your company is bound by the reporting obligation of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive? Read more about this on our page about ESG. 

The Netherlands has known some groundbreaking climate cases that have attracted a lot of international attention, such as Urgenda against the Dutch State and Milieudefensie against Royal Dutch Shell. These cases have had an impact not only nationally, but also worldwide and have paved the way for similar legal actions in other countries. The Netherlands remains a leading jurisdiction in the field of climate litigation, with new cases in preparation, such as Milieudefensie against ING and a new case against Shell.

Our Climate Litigation team uses its legal expertise and experience in climate litigation, from first instance to cassation, both in summary proceedings and in proceedings on the merits. Do you have questions about this? Please contact Arnout Koeman, head of our ESG team.

Your specialist
Arnout Koeman

Attorney at law

The legal framework

The negative consequences of climate change are recognized worldwide, as laid down in the UN Climate Convention of 9 May 1992, which has been ratified by almost all countries, including the Netherlands. This convention aims to stabilize the concentrations of greenhouse gases at a level that prevents dangerous disruption of the climate system, with attention to natural adaptation, food security, and sustainable economic development. The highest body of the convention, the Conference of the Parties (“COP”), organizes annual climate conferences.

During COP 3 in 1997, the well-known Kyoto Protocol was adopted, which since 2005 set more concrete reduction targets for 2008-2012. At COP 21 in 2016, that led to the Paris Agreement, it was agreed to keep warming well below 2°C compared to pre-industrial levels, aiming for a maximum of 1.5°C. Member states must draw up ambitious national climate plans (“NDCs”) and regularly tighten them.

During COP 26 in Glasgow (2020), it was confirmed that limiting warming to 1.5°C requires rapid, deep, and lasting reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, including a reduction of CO2 by 45% in 2030 (compared to 2010) and net zero around the middle of the century.

The EU has legislation to combat climate change. The European Green Deal, presented in 2019, aims for a climate-neutral and resource-efficient economy in 2050, decoupling economic growth from fossil fuels.

In 2021, the European Climate Law was established, aiming for net zero emissions in 2050 and a binding reduction of 55% in 2030 compared to 1990. The ‘Fit for 55’ package supports these objectives with legislative changes and new policies. Well-known examples of European legislation supporting this are the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, the EU Green Bond Regulation, and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.

The Dutch Climate Act forms a framework for the gradual reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to limit climate change. Since a legislative amendment in 2023, the Netherlands is obliged to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 at the latest and to strive for negative emissions thereafter. In addition, a reduction of 55% in 2030 and CO2-neutral electricity production in 2050 is pursued. The cabinet must periodically draw up a climate plan with the policy to achieve these goals.

Case law

Urgenda against the Dutch State

The Urgenda case was the first climate case in the world in which citizens successfully sued their government for inadequate climate policy. On 24 June 2015, the District Court of The Hague ruled that the Dutch government had to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25% by the end of 2020 (compared to 1990). After proceeding to the Supreme Court, the case was definitively won by Urgenda.

Milieudefensie against Royal Dutch Shell

This case focused on the responsibility of a large company for climate change. In May 2021, the District Court of The Hague ruled that Shell has a duty of care to combat dangerous climate change and obliged the company to reduce its global greenhouse gas emissions by 45% by 2030 (compared to 2019). On appeal, it was confirmed that Shell has a duty of care to limit its greenhouse gas emissions, but no specific reduction obligation could be imposed.

Stichting ter bevordering van de fossielvrij beweging against KLM

Stichting Fossielvrij has filed a collective lawsuit against KLM, arguing that KLM misleads consumers with incorrect sustainability claims in its advertisements (greenwashing). The Amsterdam District Court ruled on 20 March 2024 that KLM indeed acts in violation of the Unfair Commercial Practices Act by using fifteen of the nineteen examined advertisements, which suggest that flying with KLM can be sustainable or that CO2 emissions can be compensated.

Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz against Switzerland

On 9 April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights delivered a groundbreaking judgment in the case Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz against Switzerland. The Court ruled that Switzerland violates human rights by taking insufficient measures against climate change.

Advisory opinion of the Republic of Vanuatu

On 23 July 2025, the International Court of Justice in The Hague issued a historic advisory opinion on the international obligations of states regarding climate change. This advisory opinion, requested by Vanuatu due to the threat of climate change, confirms that all states must protect the climate system, even if they are not parties to climate treaties. Cooperation and support between countries are essential in this regard.

It is notable that states that do not comply with their climate obligations and cause damage can be held liable and must compensate for this damage. This can have consequences for countries and companies worldwide.

Although the advice is not binding, it has a major influence on case law. Dutch judges already use international climate agreements when assessing the duty of care in climate cases, such as in the cases against Shell and ING. It is likely that the opinion of the International Court of Justice will play a role in future climate litigation. Read more about the advice in our blog.