Greenpeace case a test for anti-SLAPP measure
Lawyers at McCann FitzGerald (MF) say that a case taken by environmental campaign group Greenpeace will provide an early look at how EU legislation against SLAPPs (strategic lawsuits against public participation) will operate.
The case follows an award of US$660 million made against the group by a jury in North Dakota in an action taken by energy infrastructure company Energy Transfer.
Energy Transfer’s claim had alleged that Greenpeace had masterminded an “unlawful and violent scheme” to harm the company’s operations by blocking the construction of the Dakota access pipeline.
Greenpeace argued that it had promoted peaceful protest and had played only a minor role in the demonstrations.
Greenpeace counter-suit
that Greenpeace has now filed a counter-suit against Energy Transfer in the Netherlands under the EU’s .
The directive aims to protect individuals and organisations from abusive lawsuits aimed at suppressing opposition, imposing financial strain on the target, and intimidating them into silence.
The directive came into force in May 2024 but has not yet been transposed into national law by any EU member state.
Greenpeace International is contesting the enforcement of the US judgment in Europe, arguing that the case in the US was a SLAPP action intended to intimidate environmental activism.
Third-country judgments
relies on articles 16 and 17 of the directive, which provide protection against the enforcement of third-country judgments considered to be SLAPPs under domestic law.
“In effect, articles 16 and 17 of the directive make it possible for Dutch courts to not only reject any potential enforcement of the decision in North Dakota, but to award damages to Greenpeace,” the MF lawyers state.
The firm notes that a hearing of Greenpeace’s action took place on 2 July and that Energy Transfer has not yet officially acknowledged the proceedings in the Netherlands, which could take 12 to 18 months.
“Even if it refuses to participate, the proceedings could continue against it in absentia,” the MF lawyers add.
Irish law
In Ireland, the , which is expected to be enacted in the autumn, partially transposes the directive’s measures in the context of defamation actions.
MF adds that the Minister for Justice has indicated that separate legislation will transpose its provisions for other types of action.
“While the directive provides a robust framework for protecting public participation in cross-border litigation, its transposition into Irish law will require careful alignment with existing procedural safeguards and common-law principles,” the firm’s lawyers state.