Peters & Peters

ESG Enforcement Tracker

Charting the rise of criminal and regulatory enforcement

NGOs and local communities sue TotalEnergies

Date:
2 January 2020
Relevant legislation/regulation:
Paris Agreement and duty of vigilance law (Article L225-102-4)
Jurisdiction:
France
Status:
Ongoing
Regulator/enforcement authority:
Civil case – NGO
ESG Category:
Environmental
Defendant(s)/subjects(s):
TotalEnergies

Key Facts:

A group of NGOs and local communities are suing TotalEnergies to force it to align its climate strategy with the Paris Agreement.

The group comprises six NGOS, including Sherpa and France Nature Environnement, and 16 local communities, including the cities of Paris, New York, Grenoble, Bayonne and Nanterre.

In the long term, the claimants hope to obtain the equivalent in France of the conviction of Shell in the Netherlands.

In the short term, they are asking the judge to take an exceptional temporary measure and order ToTalEnergies to “suspend exploration and exploitation projects for new hydrocarbon deposits that have not been the subject of a final investment decision”, and this until the case has been finally decided.

The group started the proceedings in January 2020, suing the energy giant for failing in its “duty of vigilance” in respect of the consequences of its activities on the environment. It took the view that the “vigilance plan” that TotalEnergies had published in 2019 contravened this duty, which came into effect in France in 2017.

In July 2023, a Paris judicial court dismissed the claim on procedural grounds, notably on the basis that TotalEnergies had not been duly served with formal notice in accordance with the procedural requirements and that the parties lacked legal standing to bring such a claim. The claimants’ appeal was heard in March 2024, with the decision handed down in June 2024 by a newly formed chamber in the Paris Court of Appeal.

The Paris Court of Appeal held that the claim was admissible, noting that the question of whether TotalEnergies had complied with its duty of vigilance would be a matter for the judge to consider on the merits. Not all the claimants were held to have legal standing to intervene.

The matter has been remitted back to the lower courts for the substantive issues to be considered.

Sources: 

Le Figaro article and judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal

Related Insights

The CMA’s latest guidance: making green claims across the supply chain

AI, advertising, and green claims: how the ASA is stepping up its game

ESG Enforcement Tracker featured in The Lawyer’s Spotlight

The hidden price tag: human rights and money laundering risks in supply chains

International Court of Justice confirms that States have a legal duty to protect and prevent harm to the climate

French lawmakers focus on ultra-fast fashion