abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Diese Seite ist nicht auf Deutsch verfügbar und wird angezeigt auf English


9 Feb 2023


We’re taking Shell's Board of Directors to court

Shell’s Board is legally required to manage risks to the company that could harm its future success, and the climate crisis presents the biggest risk of them all.  

Ensuring the company stays competitive in the energy markets of the future, as countries and customers worldwide choose cheaper, cleaner energy, means Shell needs to move away from fossil fuels towards an alternative business model.   

But we’re arguing that the plan Shell’s Board currently has for making that shift is simply unreasonable. 

Why? It fails to deliver the reduction in emissions that is needed to keep global climate goals within reach and continues with fossil fuel production for decades to come...

The future consequences of Shell’s flawed climate plans could cause the company’s value to plummet, costing jobs and running the risk of shareholders and investors losing significant amounts of money, including people’s pension funds.  

We believe this puts Shell’s Board in breach of its legal duties under the UK Companies Act to manage the climate risk facing the company. 

So we’re going to court.

We’re bringing this case as a shareholder in the company and are asking the court to order the Board to strengthen Shell’s climate plans. 

This will be the first time ever that a company’s board has been challenged on its failure to properly prepare for the energy transition.

The case has already received support from institutional investors who together hold over 10 million shares in the company...