Why this Peruvian farmer’s lawsuit could be a ‘game changer’ for global climate accountability

[ResidentialBusiness]

As a crucial climate lawsuit heads to trial in Germany next week, experts say the case brought by Peruvian farmer Saul Luciano Lliuya against German energy giant RWE could set a significant precedent in the fight to hold major polluters accountable for climate change.

“This is one of the first cases of its kind — a case brought by someone directly affected by climate change against a major greenhouse gas emitter — that has made it all the way to trial,” said Noah Walker-Crawford, a research fellow at the London School of Economics and an adviser to the non-profit Germanwatch, which has been advising Lliuya.

Lliuya’s lawsuit against RWE argues that the company’s historical greenhouse gas emissions have fueled global warming, accelerating glacial melt above his hometown of Huaraz, Peru. As a result, Lake Palcacocha has swelled to dangerous levels, threatening the community with the risk of catastrophic flooding.

RWE, which has never operated in Peru, denies legal responsibility, arguing that climate change is a global issue caused by many contributors.

Concern over melting glaciers

“It’s very sad and painful to see the glaciers melting,” Lliuya, 45, told Associated Press in a video call from Germany. “There is a lot of concern from people in my community about the future, about the issue of water, because all the rivers that come down from the mountains are used for farming.”

Walker-Crawford said of all these cases around the world, this is the one that’s gone the furthest.

“It has already set a partial precedent in that the courts found it admissible in 2017, which means that the judges said the case is solid in legal terms,” he said. “Now, the court is hearing evidence, and we’ll see whether the company’s responsibility can be proven in this specific case.”

Sebastien Duyck, a senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, says the reason why the case is so significant is not the decision itself or the amount of damages sought, but the precedent it would set.

“If we could use tort law to say that any fossil fuel corporation that has contributed significantly to climate change can be held liable for climate-related costs in proportion to their emissions, it could open the door for many similar cases worldwide,” he said.

Case could be a ‘game changer’

The case could be “a game changer”, according to Murray Worthy, from Zero Carbon Analytics, a research group on climate change.

“This case is absolutely crucial,” Worthy said. “While this is just one case focused on this one place in Peru, the wider implications are huge. The costs and damages from climate change could run to tens of trillions of dollars a year, and if fossil fuel companies at large are found to be responsible for those and need to pay those costs, it would completely change the finances and outlook for the entire fossil fuel industry.”

RWE is one of Germany’s largest energy companies, historically recognized as a major producer of electricity from fossil fuels.

RWE says the lawsuit is legally inadmissible and that it sets a dangerous precedent by holding individual emitters accountable for global climate change.

“In our view, there is no legal basis for holding individual issuers liable for global phenomena such as climate change. Due to the large number of global emissions of greenhouse gases from both natural and human sources, as well as the complexity of the climate, it is not possible, in our opinion, to legally attribute specific effects of climate change to a single issuer,” the company said in response to questions posed by AP.

The company insists climate solutions should be addressed through state and international policies, not the courts.

Walker-Crawford said the court is entering the evidence-gathering phase, examining whether Lliuya’s home actually faces a significant risk of flooding.

“If the court decides that the risk is high enough, it will then assess whether RWE’s emissions can be scientifically linked to that risk,” he said.

Regardless of the case’s final outcome, Walker-Crawford said it’s likely to reinforce the legal foundation for future lawsuits.

“Even if the specific risk in this case isn’t deemed high enough, the precedent that companies can be held liable for their climate impacts would still stand,” he said.

The case’s outcome could also have financial repercussions.

Climate litigation could impact financial markets

“We’re already starting to see the impact of climate litigation on financial markets,” Walker-Crawford said. “Research has shown that when climate cases against corporations move past major hurdles, it negatively affects the stock market value of the companies being sued. Investors are starting to take note of the significant financial liability climate litigation can pose.”

Lliuya, who also works as a mountain guide for tourists, said he started the lawsuit with little hope. Ten years on, that hope has grown.

“When the German judges visited my home and the lake in 2022, it gave me hope — hope that our voices were being heard and that justice might be possible,” he said. “Whatever the outcome, we have come a long way and I feel good about that,” he said.

The hearing will begin Monday.

---

Franklin Briceno in Lima, Peru, contributed to this report.

---

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

—Steven Grattan, Associated Press

View the full article