The Greenpeace v. Eni case is a pioneering climate litigation in Italy, initiated in May 2023 by Greenpeace Italy, ReCommon, and twelve Italian citizens.

They allege that Eni, along with the Italian Ministry of Economy and Finance and the development bank Cassa Depositi e Prestiti, has significantly contributed to climate change through its fossil fuel operations. The plaintiffs seek a court order compelling Eni to reduce its carbon emissions by 45% by 2030 and to acknowledge the human rights violations resulting from its activities.

The first hearing took place on February 16, 2024, at the Civil Court of Rome. However, in June 2024, the plaintiffs requested a jurisdictional review by Italy’s Supreme Court of Cassation, leading to a suspension of proceedings. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the matter in early 2025.

The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for climate litigation in Europe and globally, influencing how courts address corporate responsibility for climate change and the protection of human rights.

Climate Litigation Developments

The Greenpeace v. Eni case represents a significant development in climate litigation, marking the first climate change lawsuit filed against a privately owned company in Italy. Initiated in May 2023, the lawsuit involves Greenpeace Italy, the advocacy group ReCommon, and twelve Italian civil plaintiffs. They have filed a human rights and tort law suit against energy company Eni and two of its co-owners, the Italian Ministry of Economy and Finance and the investment bank Cassa Depositi e Prestiti S.p.A.

Background and Allegations

The plaintiffs allege that Eni’s operations have significantly contributed to climate change, thereby violating human rights. They argue that Eni was aware of the potential catastrophic impacts of fossil fuel consumption but continued its operations without adequate consideration of environmental consequences. The lawsuit seeks to compel Eni to reduce its carbon emissions by 45% from 2020 levels by 2030, aligning with the goals set by the Paris Agreement. Additionally, the plaintiffs request a declaration acknowledging the damage and violation of their human rights to life, health, and an undisturbed personal life.

Legal Proceedings and Developments

The case was filed in the Civil Court of Rome. However, in June 2024, the plaintiffs requested a suspension of the lawsuit to allow for a jurisdictional review by Italy’s Supreme Court of Cassation. This move was seen as a strategic step to expedite the trial and address the legal framework concerning climate-related lawsuits in Italy. The Supreme Court’s involvement marks the first time an Italian court has been asked to rule on the admissibility of climate change litigation against private companies.

As of May 2025, the Supreme Court has not yet issued a ruling, and the future of the case remains uncertain.

Global Implications

The outcome of the Greenpeace v. Eni case could have far-reaching implications beyond Italy. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, it could set a precedent for similar lawsuits against private companies worldwide, holding them accountable for their role in climate change. Such a ruling would reinforce the growing trend of climate litigation, where individuals and organizations seek legal redress for environmental harm. Conversely, a ruling in favor of Eni could potentially discourage future climate-related lawsuits, particularly in jurisdictions with similar legal frameworks.

In Europe, the case could influence the development of climate litigation laws, encouraging other nations to consider similar legal actions against corporations contributing to environmental degradation. Globally, the case could inspire similar initiatives, contributing to the evolution of international environmental law and corporate accountability.

Conclusion

The Greenpeace v. Eni lawsuit is a landmark case in the realm of climate litigation. Its outcome could significantly impact the legal landscape concerning corporate responsibility for climate change. As the world grapples with the escalating climate crisis, the case underscores the critical role of the judiciary in addressing environmental issues and upholding human rights. The legal community and environmental advocates alike will be closely monitoring the developments of this case, as its implications could resonate across borders and influence future legal strategies in the fight against climate change.