Emitters' claims that court case would shut them down are 'hyperbolic'
A New Zealand parliamentary committee is debating a bill that would protect major greenhouse gas emitters from being sued for climate change damages. Critics and defendants are clashing over whether the legal action against these companies is a legitimate pursuit of accountability or an economic threat.
Why it matters
The outcome of this legislation could set a significant precedent for how climate change litigation is handled in relation to existing environmental policy.
Claims that a court case against major greenhouse gas emitters would put companies out of business are "frankly hyperbolic", a select committee has heard.
Defendants in the lawsuit have told MPs a proposed law change is necessary to prevent billions of dollars in GDP being lost if the case succeeds.
The Justice Select Committee is hearing submissions on a bill that would amend the Climate Change Response Act to prevent companies being sued over damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
The bill is a direct response to climate activist Mike Smith's legal case against Fonterra, Z Energy and four other major emitters.
A hearing is set down at the High Court for next year but the proposed law would apply retrospectively, stopping Smith's case in its tracks.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in