- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- Netherlands
- /
- Greenpeace Netherlands v. State of the Netherlands
Greenpeace Netherlands v. State of the Netherlands
About this case
Filing year
2020
Status
Decided
Geography
Court/admin entity
Netherlands → The Hague → District Court
Case category
Suits against governments (Global) → GHG emissions reduction and trading (Global) → Other (Global)Suits against governments (Global) → Human Rights (Global) → Other (Global)
Principal law
–
At issue
Whether the Dutch government violated its duty of care to prevent dangerous climate change by failing to attach stringent climate conditions to its coronavirus bailout package of the airline KLM.
Topics
, ,  
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics 
Beta
12/09/2020
District Court Judgment (in Dutch)
Decision
11/18/2020
Plaintiffs' advocacy note (in Dutch
Other
09/14/2020
Notice of possible legal procedure (in Dutch)
Other
Summary
On October 7, 2020, Greenpeace Netherlands filed suit alleging that the Dutch government's bailout package for airline KLM violated the State's duty of care to prevent the high risk of dangerous climate change. In a notice of possible legal procedure sent to the Dutch government in advance of the suit, plaintiffs cited the European Convention on Human Rights and the Paris Agreement as establishing that duty of care, and the Dutch Supreme Court's Urgenda decision as affirming the duty of care. Plaintiffs alleged that by failing to attach binding climate conditions to the 3.4 billion euro bailout package, the government violated human rights. Greenpeace sought a court order either prohibiting the State from providing financial support or conditioning such support on KLM setting a cap on CO2 emissions by the airline.
On December 9, 2020, the Hague District Court judge rejected Greenpeace's claim on the grounds that the State does not have a legally enforceable obligation to attach climate conditions to the bailout package. The judge reasoned that the executive has a high level of discretion in acting to respond to the coronavirus crisis, and that a judge is limited in such situations to intervening only where a positive legal right has been violated. The judge found no such right here because the Paris Agreement and other international climate treaties do not commit parties to reducing emissions from cross-border aviation. Further, the judge noted that the sustainability conditions that were included in the bailout package were fully in line with the Netherlands' international climate obligations.
 Topics mentioned most in this case  Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Target
Policy instrument
Risk
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance