At issue: Whether advertising on an investment with its positive effect on the ‘personal carbon footprint’ is a misleading commercial practice and/or misleading by omission, when it is done in such a manner that the consumer calculates the ‘CO2 compensation’ dependent on the investment, indicating specific results
At issue: Whether Glencore, in its representations about decarbonisation plans and engagement with Traditional Owners, is engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct under the Corporations Act and/or Australian Consumer Law. Further, whether advertising material containing those representations breaches the Australian Advertising Codes.
At issue: Whether GABRIËLS & CO l.c.'s new gas station project in Boechout complies with the climate objectives under the Flemish Code for Spatial Planning
At issue: Whether who were responsible for the environmental damage caused by the oil spill of “Prestige” and the determination of the amounts of compensation of each party held liable.
At issue: Whether the approval by the Flemish authorities of INEOS' Project One is illegal under EU and Belgium laws due to INEOS' inadequate assessment of how the project would impact the climate.
At issue: Whether, in the course of preparing its environment plan for regulatory approval, Santos should have consulted with the applicant and his community; Whether the applicant and his community are considered “relevant persons” for consultation under the relevant regulations