Arizona Tribune - Court orders TotalEnergies to account for clients' emissions

The Paris Judicial Court, however, fell short of imposing measures against the French group demanded by the plaintiffs, including a halt in new fossil fuel projects and cuts in oil and gas production.

The case is the latest in a growing wave of climate litigation targeting major corporate emitters worldwide.

The NGOs and TotalEnergies battled in court over whether environmental risks fall within France's corporate duty of vigilance law, which was enacted in 2017.

"Climate-related risks and impacts to which the company may contribute through its activities fall within the scope of the law on the duty of vigilance for parent companies and ordering companies," the court said.

Company lawyers had argued during February hearings that the law did not cover global warming.

But the four NGOs that took TotalEnergies to court said the law's reference to prevention of environmental risks encompasses both local pollution and climate change.

The plaintiffs specifically accused TotalEnergies of refusing to account for indirect emissions from end users, which they say amounted to 342 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2024.

TotalEnergies argued that the law applied only to the company's own operations and those of its contractors, not to customer activity.

The court, however, said the company's vigilance plan was "incomplete" and gave TotalEnergies six months to amend it to include such emissions from end-users, known as Scope 3.

"Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions are among the emissions resulting from the group's activities within the meaning of the law, due in particular to the inherent link between oil and gas production and the combustion of the products by users," the court said.

- 'Drug dealer defence' -

TotalEnergies has said it was the victim of "demonisation" by the plaintiffs.

Its lawyers argued that climate change would continue even if the company, which accounts for less than two percent of global production, shut its operations.

The NGOs wanted the court to order a halt in new fossil fuel projects by the French energy group along with production cuts of 37 percent for oil and 25 percent for gas by 2030.

The company called the measures requested by the plaintiffs unreasonable and ineffective, arguing that production cuts or cancelled projects would simply shift output to competitors.

In a rare move, the Paris public prosecutor also intervened in the civil proceedings and echoed TotalEnergies' stance, warning that imposing an overly broad protection obligation on companies would not be workable.

The case, opened in 2020, had produced interim wins for campaigners.

In 2024, the Paris appeals court allowed the lawsuit to proceed but dismissed claims from several local authorities, including New York City, which had sought to join the case. Only the city of Paris was recognised as having standing.

Other major polluters have been taken to court around the world.

In late 2024, a Dutch appeals court overturned a landmark ruling that had ordered Shell to deepen emissions cuts. The country's Supreme Court is due to issue a final ruling on the case.

Y.Baker--AT