These are the three petroleum fields Breidablikk Tyrving Yggdrasil Both Breidablikk and Tyrving are in operation. Both of these fields produce only oil. Yggdrasil is the largest field and here there is both oil and gas. The appeal case of the climate lawsuit is divided into two. The main case will be dealt with later, but on Monday the most urgent decision was made. – The Court of Appeal’s conclusion is that the request for a temporary injunction is not accepted. Big values at stake Today’s decision is about what will happen to the three petroleum fields right now, before the climate lawsuit has been processed in the judiciary, in its entirety. It may take a long time before a final judgment is reached and these fields are operated or developed while this is in progress. These are the three petroleum fields the whole case is about. Photo: news The court therefore has the option, if you do not have time to wait, to make a time-limited decision, called a temporary injunction. It is this injunction that today’s case is about. The word may sound technical, but in this case it is about large values, which both parties have been terrified of losing. Demonstrations in support of the climate lawsuit in 2019. Photo: Terje Pedersen / NTB The environmental organizations want a temporary halt in operation and development of the petroleum fields. In the Court of Appeal, they argued that such a decision is absolutely necessary so that the environmental damage does not become even greater, while the case goes on: Carbon that is taken up by the earth, is impossible to put back down. The companies are dependent on ongoing approvals from the state, so if the state had been told not to grant any more approvals, it would have meant a halt in operation or development in the end. Nature and Youth and Greenpeace in the Borgarting Court of Appeal in September. Photo: Christian Ziegler Remme / news The state, for its part, pointed out that there was no reason to make such a decision. The state has previously written that if the injunction remains in place a year into the future, the losses could amount to several tens of billions of kroner. The parties greet each other during the appeal proceedings in the Court of Appeal. Photo: Alf Simensen / news They have shown a halt in orders, likely redundancies, negative ripple effects in the supply chain, delayed start-up and significant lost tax revenue. They also believed that it could have consequences for the supply of energy in Europe. The environmental organizations won in the district court The climate lawsuit was first heard in the Oslo district court, where the environmental organization won in 2023, both in judgment (main case) and ruling (injunction). In the district court’s ruling, it was stated that the state was not allowed to approve more decisions on the petroleum fields as long as the court case was pending. The state appealed, both the verdict and the order. The last part was dealt with in the Borgarting Court of Appeal in September and the decision came today. Not over yet The main case of the climate lawsuit will be dealt with later. Here the case concerns the actual approval of the three oil and gas fields Tyrving, Yggdrasil and Breidablikk in the North Sea. news The big picture: climate lawsuit To understand today’s decision in the climate lawsuit, we first have to go back to June 2023. Then Greenpeace and Nature and Youth sued the state. The environmental organizations believed that the state did not follow the rules, when they approved a plan for the development and operation of three petroleum fields. The petroleum fields are called Breidablikk, Yggdrasil and Tyrving, and all are located in the North Sea. Emilie Holtet / NTB The judgment in the Oslo District Court28. In November 2023, the processing of the lawsuit began, and around two months later the verdict was handed down: The environmental organizations won. The district court wrote that the decisions the state had made for the fields were invalid. The state had not assessed and described combustion emissions and climate effects. The decision-making basis was too little available to the public. Dissenting voices had not had the opportunity to express themselves. The ruling in the Oslo District CourtThe judgment also contained a ruling. It stated that the state was not allowed to make new decisions in connection with these three petroleum fields, as long as the entire climate lawsuit was not fully processed in the legal system. Such a decision is called a temporary injunction. It can be used when there is a time constraint and when it is urgent. news The state disagrees The state appealed, both the judgment and the ruling. The state believed that the decisions contained no errors and that there were no valid reasons for a temporary injunction. Immediate consequences The petroleum companies are completely dependent on the state continuously approving applications related to development and production. It is this approval that the environmental organizations will temporarily stop. The state indicated that billions of kroner were at stake, possible dismissals and bankruptcy of subcontractors. The environmental organizations argued that carbon that has been absorbed cannot be put back and will have major climate consequences. Borgarting Court of Appeal Processing of the ruling began on 3 September. This is only about what will happen to the three petroleum fields right now, before the entire climate lawsuit has been processed in court. The environmental organizations want a temporary halt in development and operation. The state completely disagrees. The decision Today, the decision was made in the ruling. The main case in the climate lawsuit will not come up until later. The Oslo district court ruled that the decisions the state had made when the approved plan for development and operation at the three fields were invalid. The reason was that the state had not assessed and described combustion emissions and climate effects well enough, or not at all. The court also wrote that the basis for the decision had not been widely available to the public and that dissenters had not had the opportunity to express themselves. Jenny Sandvig is a lawyer for the environmental organizations Greenpeace and Nature and Youth. Photo: Christian Ziegler Remme / news The lawyer for the environmental organizations Jenny Sandvig has previously said that it may take several years before the case itself is finally decided. That is the reason why both the environmental organizations and the state have fought hard against each other, for and against a temporary stop. Published 14.10.2024, at 17.11 Updated 14.10.2024, at 17.14
ttn-69
The environmental organizations did not prevail in the Court of Appeal – news Norway – Overview of news from different parts of the country
