A Northland activist wants the Supreme Court to enforce a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the likes of Fonterra.
Photo / NZME
A Northland activist wants the Supreme Court to enforce a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the likes of Fonterra.
Photo / NZME
The Supreme Court will determine whether an earlier ruling by a subordinate court to dismiss a Northland activist's push to legally enforce a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by corporate giants was correct.
Both the High Court and the Court of Appeal have ruled that Government legislation, rather than thecourts, was the best way to address climate change.
Mike Smith (Ngāpuhi and Ngāti Kahu), the climate change spokesperson for the Iwi Chairs' Forum, took a case to the High Court in 2020 asking it to legally enforce a reduction in greenhouse emissions by corporate giants, including Marsden Pt-based New Zealand Refining Company, Fonterra, Genesis Energy, Z Energy, Dairy Holdings, New Zealand Steel and BT Mining.
He said their emissions have caused, and continued to cause, damage to his whenua and sites of cultural and historical significance for him and his whānau.
Smith said their emissions constituted a public nuisance and they continued to breach their duty by contributing to climate change.
The companies accepted climate change posed a challenge, and that New Zealand should transition to a lower carbon future. But they say Smith's claims were legally untenable and applied to strike them out.
The Supreme Court - the country's highest court - will consider whether his claims are clearly untenable and should not be allowed to proceed to trial.
Because of issues raised in the appeal, the court has granted consent to the lawyers for Climate Action NZ, Te Hunga Roia Maori o Aotearoa / The Māori Law Society and the Human Rights Commission to provide submissions.
The three-day appeal begins in Auckland on Monday.
In earlier appeals, Smith contended too little was being done in the political sphere on the issue of climate change, and called for a bold response from common law through the court.
The seven New Zealand companies were all involved in industries that either emit greenhouse gases or produce or supply products which release greenhouse gases when they are burned, he said.
These activities, Smith said, contributed to dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system and led to adverse climate events.
He said poor and minority communities would be disproportionately burdened by these adverse effects.
