Shell has won a legal battle that could weaken the push for emission targets.

Shell has overturned a 2021 Dutch court mandate requiring it to cut carbon emissions by 45 per cent by 2030. 

The Hague Court of Appeal dismissed the decision, which had compelled the oil giant to reduce “scope 3 emissions” from customers burning its fuels. 

The court stated that while Shell has a duty to reduce emissions, courts cannot impose absolute targets.

This ruling came as world leaders gathered for the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, where debates over fossil fuel reliance delayed progress. 

Global energy dynamics have shifted since 2021. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 drove energy prices higher, reducing the focus on rapid decarbonisation in favour of cost stability. 

Against this backdrop, Shell CEO Wael Sawan praised the judgement, calling it “the right one for the global energy transition, the Netherlands and our company”.

Environmental organisation Friends of the Earth Netherlands, which filed the original lawsuit, expressed disappointment but vowed to continue pursuing large polluters. 

“This hurts,” said Director Donald Pols. 

“At the same time, this case has shown that large polluters are not above the law.” 

The group has yet to decide whether it will appeal to the Netherlands’ Supreme Court.

Shell noted that its own production emissions had already fallen by 30 per cent since 2016. The company plans to invest US$10 to US$15 billion in low-carbon projects by 2025 but has scaled back earlier renewable energy commitments.

The overturned ruling had inspired lawsuits worldwide, making it a milestone in corporate climate litigation. 

While the court rejected mandatory emission cuts for Shell, it affirmed companies' duty of care to mitigate climate harm. 

This may encourage future challenges, especially as Shell continues investing in new oil and gas fields - a move the court acknowledged could conflict with climate responsibilities.

Legal experts suggest the case has shifted momentum back to shareholders, with Citi analysts describing the ruling as a “best-case outcome” for Shell. 

However, environmental advocates point to emerging European laws mandating corporate climate action as a basis for continued litigation.

The judgement also coincides with a separate legal battle in Scotland, where Shell and Equinor are defending North Sea oil projects against activist-led lawsuits. 

While Shell’s victory marks a setback for campaigners, the court’s recognition of corporate climate duties suggests further challenges are inevitable. 

CareerSpot This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.