Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill

Submissions on this legislation - to the Justice Select Committee at Parliamant - are open until 9.00am , Monday 13th July 2026

The Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill is currently being considered by the Justice Select Committee having passed its 1st reading

The Purpose of the Bill is - From the Explanatory Note:

“The Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill (the Bill) amends the Act to confirm that the role of developing, setting, and implementing regulatory pol icy in respect of greenhouse gas emissions sits with the Executive and the Legislature. The Bill creates a statutory bar on tort liability for emissions-related climate change effects. That bar will apply so that no person (including the Crown) can be found liable in tort for emissions-related climate change effects. In order to ensure regulatory coherence, the statutory bar provided in the Bill applies to existing proceedings that have not been finally determined by a court or tribunal before the commencement of the Bill. The Bill responds to the pending trial of the claim not struck out in Smith v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd [2024] NZSC 5, [2024] 1 NZLR 134. The Government is concerned that that litigation could lead to a finding that causing or contributing to the emission of greenhouse gases could result in tort liability. That would create a parallel and contradictory regime to the one provided in the Act. The Government considers that tort law is not an appropriate mechanism for responding to greenhouse gas emis sions, as there needs to be careful consideration of social, economic, and distribu tional implications of different climate policy choices. The Government’s policy intention is that New Zealand’s regulatory response to climate change should be man aged through the Act. 330—1 2 Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill Explanatory note The Supreme Court’s strike-out decision, allowing the claim to proceed to trial, noted that there was no basis to conclude that Parliament had displaced the law of torts in the realm of climate change in New Zealand. The Bill excludes tort liability for climate change, and for climate change-related damage, caused by greenhouse gas emissions”

My comments:

That the Government has seen fit to propose and advance this piece of legislation is, in my view, a disgrace. The purpose of the legislation is to remove the ability of New Zealanders to legally challenge anyone, including the Crown, on the grounds of liability in tort (ie for harm caused them) for “… climate change, and for climate change-related damage, caused by greenhouse gas emissions”

The legislation appears to have been put in place to protect (a) respondant/s, who were, prior to this legislation being introduced, to be challenged in court on this issue [Smith vs Fonterra]. Coincidentally, a briefing note provided to a (then) staff member of the Prime Minister’s Office, - which included wording for the suggested legislative change that was ultimately reflected in the changes proposed - was the subject of a complaint to the Ombusman, as the document appeared to have been omitted from an OIA request on the issue.

Domestic short-comings aside, it seems to me that the Bill is also incompatible with the international position of New Zealand around climate change. In particular, New Zealand’s support of the UN General Assembly resolution welcoming the unanimous Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion on States’ obligations on climate change - which states that countries have a legal obligation to regulate and hold private entities accountable for their greenhouse gas emissions.