logo
How One Farmer's Climate Lawsuit Could Lead To A Win For The Planet

How One Farmer's Climate Lawsuit Could Lead To A Win For The Planet

Forbes01-06-2025
17 March 2025, North Rhine-Westphalia, Hamm: Peruvian mountain farmer and mountain guide Saul ... More Luciano Lliuya (r) arrives at the Higher Regional Court for the hearing of his climate lawsuit against energy company RWE and talks to journalists. Geoscientists and structural engineers appointed by the court are to present their expert opinions. The issue at stake is the danger posed to the plaintiff's house in South America by a tidal wave or mudslide. The plaintiff accuses the German company of being partly responsible for climate change due to the CO2 emissions it produces. Photo: Rolf Vennenbernd/dpa (Photo by Rolf Vennenbernd/picture alliance via Getty Images)
A farmer's climate lawsuit is a win for the planet. Recently, a German court quietly ended a landmark legal battle that had spanned nearly a decade. In Lliuya v. RWE, a Peruvian farmer and mountain guide, Saúl Luciano Lliuya, sued Germany's largest utility company, RWE, over its historic carbon emissions and the resulting impact on his hometown of Huaraz.
Though the Higher Regional Court of Hamm ruled against Lliuya, stating that he had not sufficiently demonstrated imminent danger or direct causation, the case represents something far more significant than a legal loss. It marks another pivotal moment in the evolving global discourse on climate accountability, climate justice, and how courts will address the issue of liability in an era of planetary risk.
Lliuya first went to court in 2015. He claimed that glacial melt driven by global warming had swollen a lake above his town, threatening a catastrophic flood. He asked RWE, a company responsible for roughly 0.47% of global historical emissions, to pay for protective measures proportional to its emissions. It was a novel request, but one that resonated with growing legal and ethical arguments about polluters' responsibilities to communities on the frontlines of climate change.
HUARAZ, PERU - MAY 23: Saul Luciano Lliuya (41), Peruvian farmer and mountain guide who filed a ... More lawsuit against the German electricity consortium RWE, visits the lake Palcacocha in Huaraz, Peru on May 23, 2022. (Photo by Angela Ponce for The Washington Post via Getty Images)
In many ways, this case echoed others around the world, including youth-led lawsuits like Held v. Montana. In that case, a state court ruled that Montana had violated young residents' constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment by promoting fossil fuel development. While Lliuya v. RWE did not secure a similar victory, it represents a similar trend of individuals and communities using the legal system to seek remedy and accountability in the face of government inaction and corporate pollution.
Climate litigation of this kind presents unique legal challenges. How do courts trace global emissions back to individual corporations? Can one company be held liable for incremental damage when the crisis is collective?
The court in Lliuya v. RWE essentially said no, at least not with the evidence presented. But the fact that the case advanced as far as it did is noteworthy. Most climate lawsuits do not survive procedural hurdles, let alone reach a stage where climate science and corporate responsibility are discussed in depth.
This case forced a European court to consider whether a corporation could be liable for climate-related damage across borders. Even without a favorable ruling, the legal framework it helped shape may influence other jurisdictions. Just as U.S. courts are beginning to take youth-led climate lawsuits more seriously, international courts may one day revisit Lliuya's argument with a different outcome.
The decision may be a disappointment to many climate advocates, but it is not a dead end. It is a milestone in what some legal scholars call "strategic litigation.' This is the use of the legal system not just to win individual cases, but to influence policy, raise awareness, and build momentum for broader change.
The RWE decision also arrives at a moment of heightened scrutiny for corporate climate commitments. Even as some fossil fuel companies tout their decarbonization plans, many continue to invest heavily in fossil infrastructure.
Policymakers and regulators now have an opportunity to step in where courts have hesitated. The legal questions raised by Lliuya's lawsuit could inform new laws or treaties addressing transnational environmental harm. As the world approaches COP30 and new rounds of climate finance negotiations, Lliuya's effort may serve as a moral and rhetorical guidepost.
The Higher Regional Court of Hamm may have ruled against Saúl Luciano Lliuya, but the larger movement for corporate climate accountability has gained steam. As Lliuya's case moved along in Peru, activists in Canada pushed for stronger climate disclosure standards. The legislative measure failed, but the Canadian courts issued a ruling in favor of youth climate litigants alleging government responsibility for climate change impacts. Both groups vowed to fight on, 'We were significantly disappointed with Canada's first-ever sustainability disclosure standards released last month. These new regulations are a welcome step forward, but they still fail to respond to crucial problems for our specific context in Canada. In 2025, we will continue the fight for strong sustainable finance regulation that meets international standards.'
If nothing else, Lliuya's decade-long fight reminds us that the climate crisis is personal, political, and legal. Each lawsuit, whether it ends in victory or not, helps redraw the boundaries of responsibility. In that sense, this case was never just about a glacial lake in Peru. It was about charting new paths to justice on a warming planet.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Alicorp SA (LIM:ALICORC1) Q2 2025 Earnings Call Highlights: Strong EBITDA Growth Amid Market ...
Alicorp SA (LIM:ALICORC1) Q2 2025 Earnings Call Highlights: Strong EBITDA Growth Amid Market ...

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Alicorp SA (LIM:ALICORC1) Q2 2025 Earnings Call Highlights: Strong EBITDA Growth Amid Market ...

Adjusted Gross Profit: PEN782 million, a 13% increase year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA: PEN450 million, a 22% increase year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA Margin: Improved by 0.4 percentage points to 15.1%. Consumer Goods Peru Sales Volume: 13% year-over-year increase. Consumer Goods Peru Adjusted EBITDA: Declined 18% to PEN170 million. International Business Adjusted EBITDA: PEN41 million, a 13% increase year-over-year. B2B Business Volume Growth: 27% year-over-year increase. B2B Business Adjusted EBITDA: PEN105 million, a 22% increase year-over-year. Aquafeed Adjusted EBITDA: $40 million, a threefold increase year-over-year. Leverage Ratio: Improved from 2.8x in June 2024 to 1.9x in June 2025. Available Cash Position: PEN1,521 million, an increase of PEN494 million year-over-year. Revenue Growth Guidance for 2025: Between 10% and 12%. Adjusted EBITDA Growth Guidance for 2025: Mid- to high single-digit growth. CapEx Projection for 2025: $70 million. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 8 Warning Signs with LIM:ALICORC1. Release Date: July 25, 2025 For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. Positive Points Alicorp SA (LIM:ALICORC1) successfully issued a PEN1,530 million international bond with a 7.40% coupon, reflecting strong market confidence. The Aquafeed business showed significant growth, contributing PEN88 million to the year-over-year improvement in gross profit. Adjusted EBITDA increased by 22% year-over-year, driven by growth in adjusted gross profit. The company repurchased 44.6 million shares, representing 7.23% of total issued common shares, demonstrating a commitment to shareholder value. Alicorp SA (LIM:ALICORC1) maintained a strong cash position, with available cash covering 1.2x debt maturities over the next 12 months. Negative Points The Consumer Goods Peru unit faced challenges, particularly in the detergents and edible oils categories, leading to a PEN38 million decline in adjusted EBITDA. Bolivia's challenging economic environment and social tensions impacted Alicorp's operations, with currency volatility affecting financial costs. The edible oils category experienced pressure due to rising raw material costs and increased competition from new entrants. The company anticipates challenges in EBITDA growth expectations in the second half of the year due to Bolivia's foreign exchange environment. Intense competition in the detergents market, particularly from Chinese imports, required strategic repricing and adjustments. Q & A Highlights Q: We've noticed that the only business unit showing a slight lag compared to the others is Consumer Goods Peru. What is the current outlook, and how do you expect both markets to evolve? A: The lag is due to increased competition from imported detergents, particularly from China. We have repriced and improved our value brands and core brands to address this. The outlook is positive, with volumes and market share starting to increase. We expect better dynamics for core brands in the coming quarters. - Alvaro Correa, CEO Q: Considering the company's strong cash flow generation, should we expect an increase in the dividend payout for next year? A: Our priority is to maintain financial strength and leverage within a range. While paying more dividends is an option, we are also considering growth opportunities, including the acquisition of Jaboneria Wilson in Ecuador. We aim to maintain our current dividend policy but remain open to discussions about additional dividends. - Alvaro Correa, CEO Q: Can you provide your views about consumer health in Peru and the macro situation in Bolivia? A: In Peru, consumption remains strong, supported by stable employment and economic growth of around 3-3.5%. In Bolivia, the situation is challenging due to upcoming elections, foreign exchange issues, and liquidity constraints. We are managing these challenges with stringent liquidity and foreign exchange management. - Luis Banchero Picasso, VP of Finance and Transformation Q: Could you elaborate on what has triggered the high-end competition in the oils segment in Consumer Goods Peru? A: The competition is due to increased imports of crude oil by smaller local refineries and discounters. Additionally, oil from Bolivia is entering the market. We are managing these challenges by leveraging our production capabilities in Bolivia and adjusting our strategies accordingly. - Alvaro Correa, CEO Q: What is your current strategy for hedging raw materials, and have you taken advantage of current low prices and volatility? A: We maintain a hedging strategy of three to nine months, depending on the commodity. Our approach is to mitigate volatility rather than speculate on commodity prices. We believe this provides a competitive advantage and stability in our cost structure. - Luis Banchero Picasso, VP of Finance and Transformation Q: Are the margins in the Aquafeed business sustainable, and do you plan to invest in increasing production? A: The Aquafeed business is volatile, influenced by shrimp demand and weather conditions. While margins were favorable due to good weather and controlled costs, we expect some pressure in the third quarter. We have spare capacity and will consider further investments based on demand growth. - Alvaro Correa, CEO For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Sign in to access your portfolio

ROSEN, NATIONALLY REGARDED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Easterly ROCMuni High Income Municipal Bond Fund f/k/a Principal Street High Income Municipal Fund Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action - RMJAX, RMHVX, RMHIX
ROSEN, NATIONALLY REGARDED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Easterly ROCMuni High Income Municipal Bond Fund f/k/a Principal Street High Income Municipal Fund Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action - RMJAX, RMHVX, RMHIX

Associated Press

time5 hours ago

  • Associated Press

ROSEN, NATIONALLY REGARDED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Easterly ROCMuni High Income Municipal Bond Fund f/k/a Principal Street High Income Municipal Fund Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action - RMJAX, RMHVX, RMHIX

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 27, 2025) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of shares of the Easterly ROCMuni High Income Municipal Bond Fund f/k/a Principal Street High Income Municipal Fund (the 'Fund') (tickers: RMJAX, RMHVX, RMHIX), between May 5, 2023 and June 12, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'). The Fund is a mutual fund within defendant James Alpha Funds Trust's series of mutual funds (which does business as Easterly Funds Trust). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 22, 2025. SO WHAT: If you purchased Easterly ROCMuni High Income Municipal Bond Fund mutual funds during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Easterly ROCMuni High Income Municipal Bond Fund class action, go to or call Phillip Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for more information. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 22, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Fund had marked tens of millions of dollars' worth of its portfolio assets at artificially inflated prices that did not reasonably reflect the fair value of those assets; (2) the Fund had implemented a fundamentally flawed pricing and valuation methodology which had systematically inflated the Fund's net asset value ('NAV') and individual asset valuations; (3) the Fund was more heavily invested in illiquid assets than disclosed in its offering materials; (4) the Fund's assets were more closely correlated and less diversified than disclosed in its offering materials; (5) as a result, the Fund's stated NAV, NAV per share, individual asset valuations, and historical performance were materially overstated; and (6) consequently, the Fund was subject to a material undisclosed risk of a sudden collapse in the price of Fund shares. To join the Easterly ROCMuni High Income Municipal Bond Fund class action, go to or call Phillip Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for more information. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: on Twitter: or on Facebook: Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. ------------------------------- Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 [email protected] To view the source version of this press release, please visit

ROSEN, RECOGNIZED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Fiserv, Inc. Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action
ROSEN, RECOGNIZED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Fiserv, Inc. Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action

Associated Press

time5 hours ago

  • Associated Press

ROSEN, RECOGNIZED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Fiserv, Inc. Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline in Securities Class Action

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 27, 2025) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of common stock of Fiserv, Inc. (NYSE: FI) between July 24, 2024 and July 22, 2025, both dates inclusive (the 'Class Period'). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 22, 2025. SO WHAT: If you purchased Fiserv common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Fiserv class action, go to or call Phillip Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for more information. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 22, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) due to cost issues and other problems with its older Payeezy platform, Fiserv forced Payeezy merchants to migrate to its Clover platform; (2) Clover's revenue growth and gross payment volume ('GPV'), the total monetary value of transactions processed through Clover, were temporarily and unsustainably boosted by these forced conversions, which concealed a slowdown in new merchant business; (3) shortly after these conversions, a significant portion of former Payeezy merchants switched to competing solutions due to Clover's high pricing, significant down time, and systematic compatibility issues; (4) as a result of these merchant losses, Clover's GPV growth was significantly slowing, and its revenue growth was unsustainable; and (5) based on the foregoing, Fiserv's positive Class Period statements about Clover's growth strategies, competition, attrition, GPV growth, and business prospects were materially false and misleading. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. To join the Fiserv class action, go to or call Phillip Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for more information. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: on Twitter: or on Facebook: Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. ------------------------------- Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 [email protected] To view the source version of this press release, please visit

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store