Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

Six NGOs sued TotalEnergies, alleging the company failed to adequately assess human rights and environmental impacts of its Tilenga oil project in Uganda and Tanzania, in violation of France's 2017 Duty of Vigilance Law. The project involves drilling 400 boreholes—some in Murchinson Falls National Park—and is expected to displace approximately 100,000 people. After lower courts ruled the case belonged in a commercial court, the Court of Cassation overturned those decisions on December 15, 2021, ruling that the NGOs, as non-commercial claimants, have the right to choose between a commercial or civil court. The court reasoned that the duty of vigilance is not a commercial act, meaning the case can be heard by a judicial court, which is viewed as less sympathetic to corporate interests than a commercial court.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The Court of Cassation ruled that the duty of vigilance does not constitute a commercial act and that non-commercial plaintiffs have the right to choose whether to bring their case before a commercial or civil court.
  • The Tilenga oil project, involving a pipeline from Uganda to the port of Tanga in Tanzania, is projected to displace roughly 100,000 people and requires 400 boreholes, with about one-third located in Uganda’s Murchinson Falls National Park.
  • France's 2017 Duty of Vigilance Law mandates that companies create due diligence plans to prevent environmental harm and human rights violations, extending this requirement to subcontractors and foreign subsidiaries.
  • The decision to allow the case in a judicial court is considered a victory for NGOs because judicial courts are perceived as less biased toward corporate interests than commercial courts, where judges are elected by corporate peers.

Cite the original document

APA
Natural Justice (2021). ENVIRONMENTAL COURT CASES ACROSS THE WORLD. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Friends-of-the-Earth-et-al-v.-TotaL.pdf
Chicago
Natural Justice. ENVIRONMENTAL COURT CASES ACROSS THE WORLD. 2021. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Friends-of-the-Earth-et-al-v.-TotaL.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Natural Justice |title=ENVIRONMENTAL COURT CASES ACROSS THE WORLD |date=December 2021 |url=https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Friends-of-the-Earth-et-al-v.-TotaL.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{naturaljustice2021environmental, author = {{Natural Justice}}, title = {{ENVIRONMENTAL COURT CASES ACROSS THE WORLD}}, institution = {Natural Justice}, year = {2021}, month = dec, url = {https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Friends-of-the-Earth-et-al-v.-TotaL.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated