In the ongoing climate litigation brought by 6 associations and 15 local authorities against TotalEnergies, a decision from the Paris judicial court on July 6, 2023, deemed the action inadmissible. This decision, grounded in a contested and interpretation of the duty of vigilance law and provisions related to ecological harm, has led the coalition to persist in debating the admissibility of the action before the Paris Court of Appeals.
In January 2020, a coalition of associations and local authorities(1) sued TotalEnergies before the Nanterre court, later joined by the local authorities of Paris, New York, Poitiers and Amnesty International France. The goal is to compel the oil company to take the necessary measures to align with the 1.5°C target of the Paris Agreement, in accordance with the law on duty of vigilance.
In an order dated July, 6, 2023, the Pre-Trial judge of the Paris judicial court declared the legal action inadmissible. A concerning decision considering that several other legal actions based on the duty of vigilance law have also been deemed inadmissible for reasons by academic circles and civil society organisations.
Determined to force the French oil and gas major to meet its climate obligations, the coalition is submitting their conclusions to the Court of Appeals today.
In the decision of July 6,2023, the judge ruled that TotalEnergies had not been duly served with a formal notice on the grounds that the demands made in the summons were not strictly identical to those in the formal notice sent to the multinational in June 2019.
Although the law on the duty of vigilance does not impose any mandatory “discussion” or “conciliation” phase between companies and the affected associations or individuals, this order uses a lack of dialogue as a pretext for declaring the legal action inadmissible. Even though the coalition had engaged, exchanged views, and met with the company’s directors before the formal notice was served, which is not required by law, the judge did not take these various prior exchanges into account.
The judge also ruled that local authorities would have no interest in taking action, on the grounds that the effects of climate change would be global and not limited to their territory.
Yet the duty of vigilance requires multinationals to prevent the risks of human rights, health and environmental damage caused by their activities.
The coalition intends to challenge the restriction on access to justice imposed by this decision. Furthermore, the court’s decision in this case goes against the spirit of the legislator and the numerous reports highlighting the urgency of climate change. The coalition is now turning to the Court of Appeals to have its claims recognised as admissible, so that the impact of TotalEnergies’ activities on climate change can finally be judged.
The appeal also raises the question of the impartiality of this decision on inadmissibility, following the publication of information concerning possible family ties between the Pre-Trial judge and a senior TotalEnergies executive.
The Court of Appeals’ decision is expected in 2024.
Press release from:
Sherpa, Notre Affaire à tous, France Nature Environnement, Amnesty International France, and the towns of Paris, New York, Bayonnes, Bègles, Bize-Minervois, Grenoble, Nanterre, Correns, Sevran, Vitry-le-François, La Possession, and Poitiers.
For more information: presse@asso-sherpa.org
