On May 28, 2025, the Higher Regional Court in Hamm, Germany, sided with the defendant energy company in a landmark climate change litigation case brought by a Peruvian farmer. The farmer wanted the energy company to pay (in part) the costs of protecting his property against the dangers posed by a glacial lake that threatens to overflow due to global warming.
In its decision, the Higher Regional Court rejected the farmer's claim, arguing that the farmer was unable to show that there was a substantive threat to his property.
The decision is important because the Court makes clear that the energy company could be liable in principle. The legal position taken by the Higher Regional Court in Hamm with respect to the energy company's potential liability is somewhat of an outlier in German climate change litigation cases. For instance, the climate change litigation cases that have been brought against German car OEMs have been rejected by other Higher Regional Courts without receiving any evidence.
We will continue to watch these developments closely, including lawsuits against energy companies in the Netherlands (see Landmark Climate Change Case Overturned) and the United States.
In a decision that has been ten years in the making, judges in the western German city of Hamm have thrown out the case of a Peruvian farmer seeking damages from energy giant RWE for the risk of flooding connected to melting glaciers.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
