Washington, D.C.—The Hague Court of Appeal’s ruling in favor of Shell removes a binding mandate for emissions reductions, yet it firmly upholds a critical principle: corporations have an unequivocal responsibility to protect human rights and limit emissions. The court’s decision confirms that Shell, like other major polluters, is obligated to align its operations with the Paris Agreement—a recognition that strengthens the role of science in holding corporations accountable.
Below is a statement by Dr. Delta Merner, lead scientist for the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
“Today’s ruling highlights both the progress made and the urgent work ahead. While the court affirmed Shell’s duty to reduce emissions and protect human rights, it fell short of enforcing the substantial cuts we need to minimize the climate crisis, sidestepping accountability by accepting Shell’s argument that other companies would step in if it reduced fossil fuel sales. This rationale fails to address the science-backed imperative for absolute emissions reductions across all sectors, including Scope 3 emissions.
"The science is clear: to prevent the worst impacts of climate change, companies must prioritize immediate, absolute reductions. As climate litigation advances globally, science will continue to provide a solid foundation for accountability, reinforcing the need for actions that align with our climate reality and not the narrow interests of corporations.
"From the U.S. to the Netherlands, courts are increasingly recognizing the environmental and human rights harms caused by corporate practices. While this decision is a setback, it strengthens our commitment to ensure that science continues to develop and strengthen the pursuit of climate justice.”
If you would like to get in contact with Dr. Merner or any other expert at UCS, please contact UCS communications officer Daela Taeoalii-Tipton.