abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

이 페이지는 한국어로 제공되지 않으며 English로 표시됩니다.

기사

2024년 12월 17일

저자:
Dr. Carlo Vittorio Giabardo, University of Turin

Expert highlights corporate climate responsibility and limits of litigation after “Milieudefensie vs. Shell”

"Corporate Climate Responsibility After “Milieudefensie vs. Shell” Court of Appeal Decision", 17 December 2024

The recent decision by The Hague Court of Appeal on 12 November 2024 in the case Milieudefensie vs. Shell was eagerly awaited in both legal academia and the oil and gas industry. It overturns the path-breaking initial 2021 judgment, in which the Shell group was ordered to reduce its aggregate annual volume of CO2 emissions by 45% by 2030, relative to 2019 values.

...The first point worth making clear is that the appeal decision did not retract the crucial reasoning that underpins the first-instance pronouncement, that is, under Dutch tort law principles, corporations do have a special ‘social’ duty of care to reduce emissions, in alignment with international and scientific goals, beyond existing European or domestic laws.

The Court of Appeals reiterates that Shell, in order for its actions to be considered lawful, must take into account all this vast body of formal and informal provisions well beyond strict climate legislation, to which it is directly subject (such as, at EU level, among others, the EU ETS and the next ETS 2 Directives, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, and the recent Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).

The message conveyed is that corporate compliance with existing legislation is insufficient...

For the Court of Appeal, the problem lies in the precise content of this social duty of care – i.e., the percentages of reduction and their concrete application...

Interestingly, the Court also pointed out that Shell has «tools» at its disposal that «have been developed that can help Shell influence its customers’ choices....

..[T]he Court of Appeal ... rejects a straightforward application of the 45 per cent reduction. It notes that these percentages are not meant to be equally and uniformly imposed on specific world regions, economic sectors, or companies. In the Court’s reasoning, also different sources of emissions should be burdened with different standards of reduction....The conclusion is that «the court cannot determine what specific reduction obligation applies to Shell» (§ 7:73)...

타임라인

개인정보

이 웹사이트는 쿠키 및 기타 웹 저장 기술을 사용합니다. 아래에서 개인정보보호 옵션을 설정할 수 있습니다. 변경 사항은 즉시 적용됩니다.

웹 저장소 사용에 대한 자세한 내용은 다음을 참조하세요 데이터 사용 및 쿠키 정책

Strictly necessary storage

ON
OFF

Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.

분석 쿠키

ON
OFF

귀하가 우리 웹사이트를 방문하면 Google Analytics를 사용하여 귀하의 방문 정보를 수집합니다. 이 쿠키를 수락하면 저희가 귀하의 방문에 대한 자세한 내용을 이해하고, 정보 표시 방법을 개선할 수 있습니다. 모든 분석 정보는 익명이 보장되며 귀하를 식별하는데 사용하지 않습니다. Google은 모든 브라우저에 대해 Google Analytics 선택 해제 추가 기능을 제공합니다.

프로모션 쿠키

ON
OFF

우리는 소셜미디어와 검색 엔진을 포함한 제3자 플랫폼을 통해 기업과 인권에 대한 뉴스와 업데이트를 제공합니다. 이 쿠키는 이러한 프로모션의 성과를 이해하는데 도움이 됩니다.

이 사이트에 대한 개인정보 공개 범위 선택

이 사이트는 필요한 핵심 기능 이상으로 귀하의 경험을 향상시키기 위해 쿠키 및 기타 웹 저장 기술을 사용합니다.