In a landmark decision, a German court has dismissed a climate lawsuit from a Peruvian farmer but acknowledged a potential for future accountability measures against greenhouse gas emitters.
German Court Rules Against Climate Lawsuit, Sets Precedent for Future Cases
German Court Rules Against Climate Lawsuit, Sets Precedent for Future Cases
A Peruvian farmer's climate suit was dismissed, but the ruling opens pathways for similar cases in Europe.
The Hamm Higher Regional Court ruled on May 28, 2025, that a climate lawsuit filed by Saúl Luciano Lliuya, a farmer from Peru, against the German energy company RWE, would not proceed. Despite the dismissal, the court's ruling has been seen as a pivotal moment in the fight against climate change, providing a legal framework for future cases involving corporate responsibility for global emissions.
Roda Verheyen, Lliuya’s attorney, hailed the decision as a significant advancement for climate litigations in Europe. The ruling establishes that German civil law might indeed hold companies liable for the international consequences of their emissions. Verheyen expressed optimism that this landmark judgment marks an essential step toward a global transition away from fossil fuels.
Lliuya, who also works as a tour guide, contended that his hometown of Huaraz, located in the Peruvian Andes, is at critical risk due to melting glaciers threatening flooding from Lake Palcacocha. He argued that RWE, while having no direct operations in Peru, bears partial responsibility for the climatic changes affecting his city, given that they account for approximately 0.5% of global emission totals. Lliuya sought to recover $19,000, a figure representing RWE's alleged impact on the costs associated with mitigating the dangers posed by the glacial lake.
The court had previously dispatched a team to investigate Lake Palcacocha in 2022 and convened a hearing with climate experts earlier this year. However, court-appointed experts indicated that the risk of flooding impacting Lliuya's property was statistically low, at only 1% over the next three decades.
While the ruling might be viewed as a setback for Lliuya, it also paves the way for other potential climate lawsuits in Europe, signaling a willingness from the judiciary to consider the implications of corporate emissions in global warming disputes.
Roda Verheyen, Lliuya’s attorney, hailed the decision as a significant advancement for climate litigations in Europe. The ruling establishes that German civil law might indeed hold companies liable for the international consequences of their emissions. Verheyen expressed optimism that this landmark judgment marks an essential step toward a global transition away from fossil fuels.
Lliuya, who also works as a tour guide, contended that his hometown of Huaraz, located in the Peruvian Andes, is at critical risk due to melting glaciers threatening flooding from Lake Palcacocha. He argued that RWE, while having no direct operations in Peru, bears partial responsibility for the climatic changes affecting his city, given that they account for approximately 0.5% of global emission totals. Lliuya sought to recover $19,000, a figure representing RWE's alleged impact on the costs associated with mitigating the dangers posed by the glacial lake.
The court had previously dispatched a team to investigate Lake Palcacocha in 2022 and convened a hearing with climate experts earlier this year. However, court-appointed experts indicated that the risk of flooding impacting Lliuya's property was statistically low, at only 1% over the next three decades.
While the ruling might be viewed as a setback for Lliuya, it also paves the way for other potential climate lawsuits in Europe, signaling a willingness from the judiciary to consider the implications of corporate emissions in global warming disputes.
