This month, a French court will deliver a historic verdict on the nation’s first climate lawsuit aimed at holding a multinational oil giant legally accountable for its role in global warming. Launched in 2020 by a coalition of local French authorities, Notre Affaire à Tous, and four other civil society organizations, the case targets TotalEnergies – one of the world’s top six "supermajor" oil companies. The lawsuit challenges the corporation's continued expansion of oil and gas production, which proceeds despite decades of indisputable scientific evidence showing that fossil fuels are the primary drivers of the climate crisis.

In this episode of Climate Court Voices, we sit down with Paul Mougeolle, strategic advisor for Notre Affaire à Tous. He breaks down the strategy behind this groundbreaking legal battle, explains how past international litigation inspired their case against Total, and explores what a victory would mean for global corporate accountability at a time when the 1.5°C warming threshold is slipping dangerously out of reach.

Timestamps:

(00:00) Intro

(01:21) Introducing Paul

(02:21) First steps toward suing TotalEnergies

(03:59) Who is TotalEnergies?

(05:14) France's Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law

(08:40) International legal landscape

(10:24) The ICJ advisory opinion's influence on the case

(12:27) TotalEnergies accused of greenwashing

(13:35) Scope 3 emissions

(16:38) February's hearings

(19:31) France's public prosecutor intervenes

(21:10) What happens if the court rules against Total?

(22:54) A new reality for corporate accountability?

For nearly two decades, the Endangerment Finding served as the legal bedrock of American climate policy, compelling the Environmental Protection Agency to treat carbon pollution as a threat to human survival. Today, that foundation is gone. Following the Trump administration's landmark repeal, the very framework used to regulate US emissions has vanished.

In this episode of Climate Court Voices, Noah Perch-Ahern, an attorney at Greenberg Glusker LLP, joins us to break down the fallout, from the firestorm of litigation hitting the courts to the sudden, high-stakes shift toward a patchwork of state-level regulations.

Timestamps:

(00:00) Intro

(02:23) A landmark Supreme Court ruling changes everything

(06:50) The Endangerment Finding changes everything

(09:37) Trump announces the "biggest deregulation action in US history"

(11:12) Legal challenges pile up

(13:22) What happens now?

(20:33) What happens to the EPA without the Endangerment Finding?

(22:38) Can states step in?

In 2015, a Dutch court became the first in the world to order a government to take stronger action on climate. Since then, climate litigation has evolved into a global accountability system used by private actors, civil society and individuals locally, regionally, nationally and internationally to hold governments and corporate polluters accountable.

In this episode of Climate Court Voices, Lucy Maxwell, Co-Director of the Climate Litigation Network, helps us understand how a surge in climate lawsuits in the past decade has forced governments to set clear rules for national climate action, influenced public opinion, and reshaped how investors and regulators perceive climate risk. She discusses key court battles and the legal building blocks they have established, how corporate climate litigation is beginning to catch up, and what cases we should look out for in 2026.

Timestamps:

(00:00) Intro

(01:38) The world's top court rules on climate

(03:21) Introducing Lucy

(04:20) The meaning of the Urgenda case

(07:15) New legal building blocks

(11:53) The rise of corporate climate litigation

(15:12) Pushback and progress in corporate litigation

(19:27) What happens when rulings are ignored?

(23:42) Where is climate litigation heading?

(25:43) Cases to look out for in 2026