壳牌与气候案例：壳牌集团是 "最廉价的成本规避者 "吗？

IF 1.8 Q1 LAW

European Journal of Risk Regulation Pub Date : 2024-02-29 DOI:10.1017/err.2024.5

Arnald J. Kanning

{"title":"壳牌与气候案例：壳牌集团是 \"最廉价的成本规避者 \"吗？","authors":"Arnald J. Kanning","doi":"10.1017/err.2024.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Hague District Court in the Netherlands faced a novel tort law issue in 2021 in Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell plc – namely, whether Shell is liable in tort for the reduction costs of carbon dioxide produced in the end use of energy-carrying Shell products. The civil lawsuit aims to make Shell (re)search for adequate substitutes so as to enable Shell’s customers to reduce their consumption of energy-carrying Shell products. It is argued here that Shell’s liability should be assessed within Guido Calabresi’s “cheapest cost avoider” framework.","PeriodicalId":46207,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shell and the Climate Case: Is the Shell Group the “Cheapest Cost Avoider”?\",\"authors\":\"Arnald J. Kanning\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/err.2024.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Hague District Court in the Netherlands faced a novel tort law issue in 2021 in Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell plc – namely, whether Shell is liable in tort for the reduction costs of carbon dioxide produced in the end use of energy-carrying Shell products. The civil lawsuit aims to make Shell (re)search for adequate substitutes so as to enable Shell’s customers to reduce their consumption of energy-carrying Shell products. It is argued here that Shell’s liability should be assessed within Guido Calabresi’s “cheapest cost avoider” framework.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Risk Regulation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Risk Regulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2024.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Risk Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2024.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在 2021 年 Milieudefensie 等人诉荷兰皇家壳牌有限公司一案中，荷兰海牙地区法院面临着一个新的侵权法问题，即壳牌是否应对最终使用载能壳牌产品过程中产生的二氧化碳的减少成本承担侵权责任。该民事诉讼旨在促使壳牌（重新）寻找适当的替代品，使壳牌的客户能够减少对壳牌载能产品的消耗。本文认为，壳牌公司的责任应在 Guido Calabresi 的 "最廉价成本避免者 "框架内进行评估。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Shell and the Climate Case: Is the Shell Group the “Cheapest Cost Avoider”?

The Hague District Court in the Netherlands faced a novel tort law issue in 2021 in Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell plc – namely, whether Shell is liable in tort for the reduction costs of carbon dioxide produced in the end use of energy-carrying Shell products. The civil lawsuit aims to make Shell (re)search for adequate substitutes so as to enable Shell’s customers to reduce their consumption of energy-carrying Shell products. It is argued here that Shell’s liability should be assessed within Guido Calabresi’s “cheapest cost avoider” framework.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

European Journal of Risk Regulation LAW-

CiteScore

6.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： European Journal of Risk Regulation is an interdisciplinary forum bringing together legal practitioners, academics, risk analysts and policymakers in a dialogue on how risks to individuals’ health, safety and the environment are regulated across policy domains globally. The journal’s wide scope encourages exploration of public health, safety and environmental aspects of pharmaceuticals, food and other consumer products alongside a wider interpretation of risk, which includes financial regulation, technology-related risks, natural disasters and terrorism.