Communities Vs Fossil Fuel Firms: Suing Over Climate Change

Climate change is already causing serious damage to communities around the world, from rising sea levels and increased flooding to more frequent and severe wildfires. In the face of these impacts, a growing number of communities are taking fossil fuel companies to court, seeking to hold them accountable for their role in contributing to climate change and its consequences. These lawsuits allege that fossil fuel companies have long understood the link between their products and climate change but have failed to take action to mitigate their impact on the planet and public health. As communities bear the costs of adapting to and recovering from climate disasters, they are demanding that fossil fuel companies be held liable for their share of responsibility.

Suing for damages

The primary motivation for communities to sue fossil fuel companies is to hold them accountable for the damage caused by climate change and seek compensation to mitigate the financial burden of adapting to and recovering from its impacts. This includes the costs of rebuilding infrastructure, addressing property damage, and safeguarding public health and safety.

In the United States, several communities have initiated legal action against fossil fuel companies, including Honolulu and Maui in Hawaii, Baltimore, Maryland, Oakland, California, Boulder, Colorado, and New York City. These lawsuits assert that fossil fuel companies knowingly contributed to the adverse effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels and increased flooding, wildfires, and extreme weather events.

The suits are modelled after the "Big Tobacco" cases, accusing fossil fuel companies of spreading disinformation and making false or misleading claims about climate change. Internal documents and research from these companies reveal that they were aware of the dangers of climate change and the link between fossil fuel emissions and global warming as early as the 1960s and 1980s.

The financial implications of these lawsuits for fossil fuel companies and their investors could be significant. Climate litigation seeks to hold these companies accountable for their role in the climate crisis and contribute to the costs incurred by affected communities.

While some cases have been dismissed or are facing legal challenges, the trend of communities taking legal action against fossil fuel companies is likely to continue as the impacts of climate change become more severe.

Suing for misleading advertising

Fossil fuel companies have been accused of using advertising to greenwash their continuing contribution to climate change. In 2021, lawyers from ClientEarth released the Greenwashing Files, which revealed that some of the biggest fossil fuel companies had used advertising to mislead the public about their commitment to sustainability and clean energy. The companies named in the report include ExxonMobil, Aramco, Chevron, Shell, Equinor, Total, RWE, Drax and Ineos.

The Greenwashing Files detail how these companies have misrepresented the sustainability of their activities, avoided disclosing their total greenhouse gas emissions, and overrepresented their investments in clean energy. For example, ExxonMobil's advertising suggests that its experimental algae biofuels could reduce transport emissions, yet the company has no company-wide net-zero target. Similarly, Chevron claims to be "part of the solution" to climate change, but it does not have a net-zero commitment or a strategy aligned with the Paris Agreement.

Misleading advertising by fossil fuel companies is a growing area of litigation. As of 2025, 86 climate lawsuits had been filed against the world's largest oil, gas, and coal-producing corporations, with misleading advertising claims accounting for 16% of these cases. All but one of the nine concluded cases that accused companies of misleading advertising have resulted in decisions against the companies or the companies retracting the claims.

In addition to litigation, there have been calls for greater regulation of fossil fuel advertising. Lawyers from ClientEarth, for instance, have called for tobacco-style advertising bans and health warnings to curb deceptive marketing by fossil fuel companies. They argue that such warnings should inform the public about the dangers of climate change and clearly state that fossil fuel products are the main cause of global warming.

The lawsuits and calls for regulation underscore the need for fossil fuel companies to be held accountable for their role in perpetuating a false narrative about the harm caused by their products. As communities and local governments seek to address the impacts of climate change, it is crucial that fossil fuel companies are transparent about their activities and contributions to the climate crisis.

Suing for emissions reduction

One notable example is the case of *Milieudefensie et al. v. Royal Dutch Shell plc.*, in which Friends of the Earth Netherlands, along with several NGOs and over 17,000 citizens, served Shell with a court summons in 2019. They argued that Shell had a duty of care to reduce its emissions in order to protect human rights and align with the Paris Agreement. In a landmark ruling, the District Court of The Hague ordered Shell to reduce its emissions by 45% by 2030, setting a binding precedent for emissions reduction targets.

Another case involves four residents of Pari Island in Indonesia, who initiated legal proceedings against the Swiss cement firm Holcim in 2022. They sought a 43% reduction in Holcim's carbon emissions by 2030 and claimed compensation for damages caused by frequent flooding on the island.

These lawsuits are part of a growing trend of legal actions targeting fossil fuel companies for their contribution to climate change and their failure to take adequate action to address it. By holding these companies accountable, communities and governments are sending a strong message that the public will not tolerate deception and inaction in addressing the climate crisis.

Suing for greenwashing

The strategy of fossil fuel companies has evolved from outright climate denial to delaying action on climate change through confusing greenwashing tactics. Greenwashing is when polluters engage in false advertising and deceptive trade practices, and make untrue claims about the environmental benefits of using their products.

In April 2021, New York City filed suit in the New York Supreme Court against Exxon, Shell, BP, and the American Petroleum Institute, alleging greenwashing. The suit accused the companies of a disinformation campaign, citing internal memos and advertising that downplayed the dangers of climate change.

Fossil fuel companies have long understood the causal relationship between their products and climate change, yet have not only continued to extract and sell them but have also engaged in campaigns of disinformation to downplay the seriousness of the issue and mislead the public and policymakers.

In addition to New York City, Baltimore, Maryland; Oakland, California; Boulder, Colorado; and other cities and states are suing fossil fuel companies for property damage, economic injuries, and impacts on public health caused by climate change and sea-level rise. These lawsuits seek to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for their role in creating and perpetuating a false narrative about the harm caused by their products and for spreading disinformation about climate change.

The strategy appears to be working, with more than half of cases with judicial outcomes leaning toward stronger climate action. As global temperatures and emissions continue to climb, communities are increasingly turning to the courts to challenge fossil fuel companies' activities and hold them accountable for their contributions to the climate crisis.

Suing for consumer protection

In the United States, consumer protection lawsuits against fossil fuel companies often rely on a common-law cause of action called public nuisance. This means that fossil fuel companies, by contributing to climate change, have harmed the general right to atmospheric stability.

In June 2023, Multnomah County, Oregon, sued several fossil fuel companies and industry trade groups, seeking at least $50 billion to help the county implement harm reduction strategies. The lawsuit also sought $50 million to cover past damages and $1.5 billion in future damages. The plaintiffs alleged that the fossil fuel companies had deceptively used "pseudo-science, fabricated doubt, and a well-funded, sustained public relations campaign" to subvert the scientific consensus over several decades.

In 2017, San Francisco, Oakland, and other California coastal communities sued multiple fossil fuel companies for rising sea levels. However, they lost the case.

In 2018, the city of New York announced that it was taking five fossil fuel firms (BP, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and Shell) to federal court due to their contribution to climate change.

In 2020, Charleston, South Carolina, followed a similar strategy.

Frequently asked questions