Peruvian Farmer’s Lawsuit Against RWE May Redefine Global Climate Accountability

Peruvian Farmer’s Fight Against RWE Could Set a Landmark Climate Precedent

Peruvian Farmer’s Legal Battle Against German Energy Giant RWE Could Set a Global Precedent

A landmark climate lawsuit is set to go to trial in Germany this week, and legal experts believe the case filed by Peruvian farmer Saul Luciano Lliuya against German energy company RWE could establish a crucial precedent in the push to hold major corporations accountable for climate change.

Lliuya’s claim asserts that RWE’s historical greenhouse gas emissions have significantly contributed to global warming, leading to accelerated glacial melting above his hometown, Huaraz, in Peru. This, in turn, has caused Lake Palcacocha to expand to perilous levels, posing a severe flood risk to his community.

"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," stated Noah Walker-Crawford, a research fellow at the London School of Economics and an adviser to the non-profit Germanwatch, which has been supporting Lliuya.

Despite never operating in Peru, RWE denies legal liability, contending that climate change is a complex global issue caused by numerous sources.

The Threat of Melting Glaciers

"It’s very sad and painful to see the glaciers melting," Lliuya, 45, told 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 noted that among similar cases worldwide, this one has advanced 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 explained. "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, emphasized that the case’s significance lies not just in the potential ruling or damages but in the broader legal precedent it may establish.

"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.

A Potential Game Changer

Murray Worthy, from the climate research group Zero Carbon Analytics, described the case as "a game changer."

"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."

As one of Germany’s largest energy producers, historically reliant on fossil fuels, RWE argues that the lawsuit lacks legal standing. The company warns that holding individual emitters accountable for global climate change could set a dangerous precedent.

In response to inquiries from the Associated Press, RWE asserted that there is "no legal basis" for holding specific companies liable.

"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 (emitter)," the company stated.

RWE maintains that addressing climate change should be the responsibility of governmental and international policy frameworks, not judicial systems.

Walker-Crawford explained that the court is now in the process of evaluating evidence, determining whether Lliuya’s home is indeed at substantial 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 final verdict, Walker-Crawford believes the case will strengthen the legal framework for future climate 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.

Climate Lawsuits and Financial Markets

The case’s outcome could have broader financial consequences.

"We’re already starting to see the impact of climate litigation on financial markets," Walker-Crawford noted. "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, initially had little expectation of success when filing the lawsuit. A decade later, his outlook has shifted.

"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."

The trial is set to commence on Monday.