Abstract

This analysis considers the implications of Smith v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd [2020] NZHC 419 and the possibility of a new tort to the environment developing within New Zealand jurisprudence. In Smith, the New Zealand High Court refused to strike out a cause of action based on a new inchoate tort against seven corporations for the damage likely to be caused by their greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), and allowed the matter to proceed to trial. The case raises questions as to whether the time is ripe in New Zealand for the development of a tort to the environment, and whether such a tort could apply to hold private emitters liable for harm caused to the atmosphere by GHGs. In this analysis, we conclude that a duty to protect the environment may be a natural evolution of the New Zealand law of torts and may extend to conduct causing damage to the atmosphere, opening up the possibility of successfully suing corporations for harm to the climate.

中文翻译：

---

向环境侵权：是遥不可及还是向前迈进了一步？Smith v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd及其他人[2020] NZHC 419

摘要

该分析考虑了Smith v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd [2020] NZHC 419的含义以及新西兰判例中对环境造成新侵权的可能性。在史密斯，新西兰高等法院拒绝就7家公司因其温室气体排放（GHGs）可能造成的损害而基于新的早期侵权行为提出诉讼理由，并允许此案进行审理。该案引发了这样的疑问：在新西兰，对环境的侵权行为发展的时机是否成熟，以及这种侵权行为是否可适用于使私人排放者对温室气体对大气造成的损害负责。在此分析中，我们得出的结论是，保护环境的责任可能是新西兰侵权法的自然演变，并且可能扩展到对大气造成损害的行为，从而为成功起诉公司损害气候的可能性提供了可能性。