At least 207 court cases in 31 countries outside the United States have targeted companies over climate change, according to new research from the University of Surrey. The study of corporate climate litigation found that banks, brands, airlines and carbon credit projects are facing claims alongside oil giants.
The research, published in the Journal of Environmental Law, found that the cases span nine types of claims. It shows how claimants are using existing laws to challenge what companies build, what they say about their products and where they invest.
How the 207 cases were identified
The cases come from the database of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. The university described the database as widely regarded as the most comprehensive record of climate litigation, though not an exhaustive one. It holds more than 4,700 cases worldwide.
Researchers narrowed this to judicial claims outside the US in which a company was named as a defendant as of 1 February 2026. They recorded the claimants, legal arguments and remedies sought, then grouped the cases by what each claim aimed to achieve.
Corporate climate litigation beyond oil companies
Dr Ekaterina Aristova, Senior Lecturer in Private Law at the University of Surrey, said: “The two largest groups in my dataset are challenges to new projects and greenwashing claims about products. Companies are also being sued over carbon credits and the activities they finance. Looking only at the high-profile cases against oil companies misses much of what is happening in courts.”
The inclusion of claims over financed activities places banks within the scope of the review alongside energy producers and consumer brands. Climate Global News has previously reported on the financial case for measuring nature-related impact and dependency.
Lessons from the RWE case in Germany
The study highlights that even a failed lawsuit can open the door to corporate climate liability. In a case brought by a Peruvian farmer against German energy company RWE, the Higher Regional Court of Hamm dismissed the claim in 2025 because it found no imminent danger to his property.
However, the court recognised that major emitters could, in principle, be held liable under German civil law for their contribution to climate-related harm, even thousands of miles away. According to the university, the ruling shows why the outcome of a single case does not necessarily settle the wider question of corporate responsibility.
Different rules in different jurisdictions
The research also shows why a successful argument in one country may fail in another. Courts apply different rules on who can bring a case, what harm must be proved and what remedies they can order.
Some claims in the review succeeded, some failed and many are still pending or remain subject to appeal.
Measuring the wider effects of climate lawsuits
Dr Aristova said that outcomes in court are not the only way to assess the impact of corporate climate litigation.
“A court victory is only one way to judge these cases. A dispute can also affect how companies explain climate risks or prompt closer scrutiny of a project. We need to look at those effects without assuming that every lawsuit delivers the change its claimants seek,” she said.
Frequently asked questions
How many corporate climate lawsuits has the University of Surrey study identified?
The study identified at least 207 court cases in 31 countries outside the United States in which companies have been targeted over climate change.
Which types of companies are facing climate lawsuits?
Banks, brands, airlines and carbon credit projects are facing claims alongside oil giants, according to the research. The cases span nine types of claims.
What are the most common types of corporate climate claims?
According to Dr Ekaterina Aristova, the two largest groups in the dataset are challenges to new projects and greenwashing claims about products.
Where did the data for the climate litigation study come from?
The cases come from the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law’s database of more than 4,700 cases worldwide, narrowed to judicial claims outside the US in which a company was named as a defendant as of 1 February 2026.
What did the German court decide in the RWE climate case?
The Higher Regional Court of Hamm dismissed a Peruvian farmer’s claim against RWE in 2025 because it found no imminent danger to his property. It recognised, however, that major emitters could, in principle, be held liable under German civil law for their contribution to climate-related harm.
