EXPLORING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DUTY OF CARE IN CORPORATE CLIMATE LITIGATION

AUTHOR – SIKHA GEORGE SOHAN, STUDENT AT CHRIST (DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY)

BEST CITATION – SIKHA GEORGE SOHAN, EXPLORING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DUTY OF CARE IN CORPORATE CLIMATE LITIGATION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (1) OF 2026, PG.1031-1044, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/XUMU2820

ABSTRACT

This research explores the transforming role of the concept of Duty of Care in the space of Corporate Climate litigation and its governance. This change is primarily centred around the recognition of a significant gap in the understanding of fiduciary duties which have been historically centred around shareholder value, with a causal neglect of environmental considerations. The recognition is after an inquiry into the effects of climate change related risks on climate litigation and governance frameworks in different jurisdictions.

 The paper’s aim is to explore the duty of directors to include climate related risks into their duties; identify and analyse the key climate litigation cases and examine the legal frameworks and approaches within different jurisdictions, including across the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, and India. The paper will investigate exceptional cases such as Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell and ClientEarth v. Shell, which are pioneering litigation cases which can establish corporate liability for harming climate as well as environmental degradation associated with climate action. The cases also open up potential for derivative actions to be taken against corporate directors. Furthermore, this study focuses on the implications of litigation on boards, and significance of associated climate risk assessments in corporate risk management, responsibilities of Board members in climate related disclosures, adapting business models to address climate risks and addressing governance based on the rights of shareholders and stakeholders.

In terms of the methodology, the study employs a doctrinal analysis of statutory and regulatory provisions and case law, corporate governance codes and standards, and international and domestic regulatory frameworks, along with comparative explorations of the legal frameworks and practices of corporate accountability for climate in the difference jurisdictions. This paper is an important scholarly and practitioner contribution to the literature on corporate climate governance by bridging gaps in our understanding of the legal, strategic and operational dimensions of climate related corporate duties.

KEYWORDS- Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell, ClientEarth v. Shell, stakeholders, corporate accountability, corporate climate governance