Translating climate science into legal standards: lessons from the Milieudefensie v. Shell case

As the world struggles to meet the Paris Agreement’s temperature goals, climate litigation has become a powerful tool. The case Milieudefensie v. Shell (“the Milieudefensie case”) stands out not only for its ambitious claims and the initial landmark ruling by the Hague District Court, but also because its 2024 appeal judgment raises important questions about the future of corporate climate accountability. A central issue emerging from the ruling is that courts, despite having applied the results of integrated assessment models (IAMs) to governments, appear to struggle with applying them to individual companies. Understanding challenges in translating climate science into legal standards is critical for litigation but also for the broader development of regulatory norms and standards. By examining the scientific evidence, particularly the application of IAMs to corporate emissions pathways, we provide guidance for litigators, experts, courts, and policy-makers as they navigate the evolving legal landscape of corporate climate responsibility.