Climate lawsuit filed by Peruvian farmer against RWE unsuccessful - Farm worker in Peru loses legal battle against German energy company RWE over climate change impacts on his crops.
In a significant development, a civil lawsuit filed by Peruvian farmer Saul Luciano Lliuya against German energy giant RWE has been dismissed. The lawsuit, often referred to as a "climate lawsuit," aimed to hold RWE partially liable for climate change-related risks to Lliuya's property caused by glacier melt and potential flood danger in Peru, attributed to RWE's CO2 emissions.
The Higher Regional Court (OLG) in Hamm, presided over by Judge Rolf Meyer, described the case as significant, noting that the court and expert costs alone amounted to approximately 800,000 euros. The court dismissed the Peruvian's lawsuit, stating that the likelihood of Lliuya's house being affected by a flood wave was too low, based on expert opinions.
The ruling is consistent with German legal precedent, emphasizing that RWE cannot invoke the supply mandate existing under German law to justify an impairment of Lliuya's property in Peru. However, the OLG did stress that RWE could potentially be obliged to bear costs related to protective measures if the plaintiff has a claim under the Civil Code.
Roda Verheyen, attorney for Luciano Lliuya, thanked the court for treating the case seriously, stating that large emitters can be held accountable for the consequences of their greenhouse gas emissions under German civil law. However, Verheyen acknowledged that the court did not find the flood risk for her client high enough. She viewed the decision as a milestone, believing it would boost climate lawsuits against fossil companies worldwide.
Environmental organization Greenpeace also viewed the ruling as a success for climate protectors, stating that large climate-damaging companies can be held accountable for their role in the climate crisis. From RWE's perspective, the OLG decision thwarted the attempt by non-governmental organizations to create a precedent through litigation to hold companies accountable for global climate change impacts under German law.
The case puts forth notable legal implications for companies regarding climate change impacts in foreign countries. It highlights the challenges in proving causation and imminent danger, the limits on civil liability for climate change, the difficulty in assigning responsibility among multiple polluters, and the precedent from other German climate lawsuits dismissed due to compliance with relevant public law regulations. This case underscores the legal limitations and complexities faced by foreign plaintiffs seeking to hold corporations accountable for global climate change impacts through civil litigation.
- The Commission, in light of the dismissed lawsuit, might consider incorporating discussions on the role of science in determining causation and imminent danger for environmental-science-based climate lawsuits in the proposal for a Council Directive on the labelling of foodstuffs.
- As the finance industry increasingly invests in renewable energy sources, understanding the legal and environmental ramifications of such actions, as outlined in the OLG's ruling, will be crucial to minimize potential liabilities and negative impacts on the environment.
- Collaboration between the Council, industry, and environmental-science experts is essential to develop effective strategies for addressing climate-change challenges, ensuring that companies fulfill their responsibilities while minimizing the risks of costly litigation and potential property damage in foreign countries.
