Saul Luciano Lliuya, a Peruvian farmer, is suing RWE in Germany for climate change damages affecting his hometown. He demands 17,000 euros for flood prevention measures, linking RWE’s emissions to climate risks. The case could set legal precedents in climate liability, as recent court hearings are set to determine flood risks and RWE’s responsibility.
Saul Luciano Lliuya, a Peruvian farmer, is engaged in a significant legal confrontation with the energy company RWE in a German court, seeking compensation for climate change impact. He asserts that the utility company, among the largest carbon dioxide emitters globally, should contribute to protecting his hometown of Huaraz from a glacier lake posed to overflow due to climate change induced melting. Lliuya requests RWE to pay 17,000 euros ($18,400) for flood defenses, stating the company’s emissions necessitate shared accountability for the risks faced by his community.
Despite Lliuya’s confidence, the legal proceedings have progressed slowly. He initiated his lawsuit in 2015; however, it was initially dismissed by a court in Essen. In 2017, a higher court in Hamm permitted an appeal. After pandemic-related delays, hearings are now scheduled, during which Lliuya intends to present his case. He remarked on the unexpected duration of the legal process, expressing his continued determination to achieve a favorable outcome.
The upcoming hearing in Hamm will evaluate the potential flood risk to Lliuya’s property, based on evidence from experts who investigated the area in 2022. Should the threat be confirmed, subsequent hearings will determine RWE’s liability. Lliuya’s argument stems from a 2014 study attributing 0.47 percent of global carbon emissions since the industrial era to RWE, indicating the company should pay this share of costs associated with mitigating dangers from Lake Palcacocha.
RWE, established in 1898, utilizes a range of energy sources, including fossil fuels and renewables. Francesca Mascha Klein from Germanwatch, which supports Lliuya, advocates for the company to contribute fairly towards climate-related damages they have helped create. RWE counters that a favorable ruling for Lliuya could set a troubling legal precedent, imposing responsibility for environmental impacts globally. A previous ruling by the Essen court stated the challenge in linking specific emissions to distinct damages.
As the Hamm court convenes, it may potentially reshape legal standards related to climate liability amidst a growing number of climate damage cases worldwide, as noted by Zero Carbon Analytics. RWE’s representation, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, acknowledges the significant implications such a case could hold, despite the comparatively minor financial stakes.
The legal contest between Saul Luciano Lliuya and RWE epitomizes the emerging conflicts surrounding climate accountability. Lliuya’s pursuit of compensation for flood risks linked to RWE’s greenhouse gas emissions highlights the need for companies to assume responsibility for their environmental footprint. The Hamm court’s proceedings could influence future climate-related lawsuits, potentially shifting the landscape of corporate accountability for climate damage.
Original Source: www.rfi.fr
