Technology and Science19 August, 20262 min read
New Zealand Passes Climate Change Response Tort Liability Amendment Bill To Block Climate Claims
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
Parliament passed the Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill blocking climate-related tort lawsuits. Law bars tort claims against greenhouse gas emitters, limiting litigation against major emitters.
9 outlets told this the same way.
New Zealand blocks tort claims
New Zealand passed the Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill on August 18, amending the Climate Change Response Act 2002 to prevent all current and future civil claims for climate loss or harm under tort law. The bill passed its third reading on August 18 by 67 votes to 53, and it is expected to take effect in the coming days after it is formally signed by the Governor-General.
“The Climate Change Response Amendment Bill passed its third reading on August 18 by 67 votes to 53.”
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the legislation gives companies greater clarity over their climate obligations, arguing that ongoing High Court litigation risks developing a new regime that contradicts the framework Parliament has already enacted. The law directly affects litigation brought by Māori climate activist Mike Smith against six major businesses, including Fonterra and Z Energy, with the Supreme Court previously allowing Smith’s claims to proceed and a trial expected to reach in 2027.
Goldsmith vs Smith
Goldsmith told Parliament the courts are not the right place to resolve claims of harm from climate change, and he said tort law is not well-suited to respond to a problem involving complex environmental, economic and social factors. Smith described the legislation as “deeply concerning,” saying “we cannot simply assume that governments or major corporations will do what is necessary, or do it quickly enough, to protect our communities from the climate crisis.”
In the same debate, Labour MP Camilla Belich argued that “rights certainly will be” removed, and she said it was hard to know why the legislation came with such urgency “to prevent Mr Smith from following through on those exact rights.” The Climate Home News account adds that Smith said the timing raises “profound questions about the separation of powers and the rule of law,” while also noting that the bill coincided with the Supreme Court hearing another of his climate lawsuits, Smith v Attorney-General.
What changes next
The government framed the measure as protecting investment certainty while opponents argued it restricts judicial oversight and removes a potential avenue for corporate climate accountability. The Climate Home News report says the bill “prevents all current and future civil claims” for emissions-related climate change effects, and it also states that it would not alter the government’s responsibilities under the Climate Change Response Act 2002 nor business obligations under the Emissions Trading Scheme.
ESG News | Other says the immediate effect for corporate boards is greater protection from a developing category of common-law climate claims in New Zealand, while also noting that climate-related legal exposure is expanding internationally. The same source describes the shift as narrowing one pathway in New Zealand while placing more pressure on elected governments and regulators to determine how corporate responsibility for climate harm should be allocated, as the decision highlights a widening divergence between jurisdictions over whether climate accountability develops through legislation, regulation, litigation, or a combination.