Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Killings and repression of defenders · France, United Kingdom, United States · 2019–2024

Corporate suits against Greenpeace (TotalEnergies, Shell, Resolute)

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
  • The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
What the record lacks: 3 none on record · 2 insufficient · 1 not measured · 3 disputed See the gaps

TotalEnergies, Shell and Resolute Forest Products each brought civil claims against Greenpeace entities. The TotalEnergies suit was dismissed on procedural grounds, the Shell claim was settled, and the Resolute claims were dismissed before the parties announced the end of the litigation.

2 dismissed, 1 settledOutcomes of the three suits
TotalEnergies: dismissed on procedural grounds (March 2024). Resolute: claims dismissed (2019, 2023); the parties announced the end of the litigation in April 2024, terms not recorded. Shell: settled (December 2024).

Status As of October 2026: the TotalEnergies suit was dismissed (March 2024), the Shell claim was settled (December 2024), and the parties announced the conclusion of the Resolute litigation (April 2024); the outcome of Resolute's appeal was not found.

What?
Three corporate civil claims against Greenpeace entities: TotalEnergies v Greenpeace France, Shell v Greenpeace UK and International, and Resolute Forest Products v Greenpeace.
Where?
Paris (Judicial Court), the Admiralty Court in the United Kingdom, and the Northern District of California.
When?
Outcomes between January 2019 and December 2024; research position as of 15 October 2026.
Who?
Gained
  • Greenpeace France — The TotalEnergies suit against it was dismissed on procedural grounds in March 2024. Climate Case Chart
  • RNLI — Received £300,000 from Greenpeace under the Shell settlement. Brick Court Chambers
  • Shell — Obtained 500-metre exclusion zones at its sites for 5 or 10 years under the settlement. Brick Court Chambers
Lost
  • Greenpeace — Paid £300,000 to the RNLI and accepted exclusion zones in the Shell settlement. Brick Court Chambers
  • Resolute Forest Products — Its RICO claims were dismissed; it was ordered to pay about $816,000 in fees (source: Greenpeace).
Harmed
None on record
Why?
TotalEnergies' suit concerned a Greenpeace report on its emissions; Shell's concerned the boarding of the Penguins FPSO; the sources reviewed do not state what Resolute's claims were about.
How?
TotalEnergies' suit was dismissed on procedural grounds; Shell's was settled; Resolute's claims were dismissed in 2019 and 2023, and the parties announced the end of the litigation in April 2024.
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

Three companies brought civil claims against Greenpeace entities, with outcomes recorded between 2019 and 2024: TotalEnergies against Greenpeace France, Shell against Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International, and Resolute Forest Products against Greenpeace in a United States federal court.

TotalEnergies sued Greenpeace France in 2023 over a Greenpeace report published in November 2022. According to the case record, TotalEnergies had declared 455 Mt CO2e of emissions for 2019, while Greenpeace estimated about 1.64 Gt. TotalEnergies asked for the report's removal and for €2,000 per day. On 28 March 2024 the Paris Judicial Court dismissed the suit on procedural grounds: the summons was too vague under Article 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

In February 2023 Shell filed a claim in the Admiralty Court against Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International over the boarding of the Penguins FPSO. Shell claimed damages of about £800,000 plus costs; Greenpeace said the claim was worth up to $2.1 million. The claim was settled on 10 December 2024. Greenpeace gave £300,000 to the RNLI, admitted no liability and accepted 500-metre exclusion zones at Shell sites for 5 or 10 years.

Resolute Forest Products brought racketeering (RICO) claims against Greenpeace in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. In January 2019 the court dismissed the RICO claims, together with 294 of 296 statements. In April 2020, according to Greenpeace, Resolute was ordered to pay about $816,000 in fees under California's anti-SLAPP law. In April 2023 the remaining claims were dismissed, and Resolute appealed to the Ninth Circuit in May 2023. On 26 April 2024 Greenpeace Canada published a release headed "Resolute and Greenpeace parties announce the conclusion of long-running litigations".

A HuffPost Canada item dated 20 March 2013 is headed "Greenpeace Canada Resolute retraction". the sources reviewed describe it as a withdrawn claim caused by a map error. The notes do not state how it relates to the lawsuits.

  1. 201320 March: HuffPost Canada reports a Greenpeace Canada retraction concerning Resolute (notes: map error)
  2. 2019January: US federal court dismisses Resolute's RICO claims and 294 of 296 statements
  3. 2020April: Resolute ordered to pay about $816,000 in fees under California's anti-SLAPP law (per Greenpeace)
  4. 2022November: Greenpeace report on TotalEnergies' emissions (declared 455 Mt CO2e for 2019; Greenpeace estimate about 1.64 Gt)
  5. 2023TotalEnergies sues Greenpeace France; February: Shell files Admiralty Court claim over the Penguins FPSO boarding; April: Resolute's remaining claims dismissed; May: Resolute appeals to the Ninth Circuit
  6. 202428 March: Paris court dismisses TotalEnergies' suit; 26 April: Greenpeace Canada announces conclusion of litigation with Resolute; 10 December: Shell claim settled

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

How large were TotalEnergies' 2019 emissions?
Company or project
TotalEnergies

Declared 455 Mt CO2e for 2019 and sued over the report, asking for its removal and €2,000 per day.

Communities and civil society
Greenpeace France

Its November 2022 report estimated about 1.64 Gt for 2019.

Courts
Paris Judicial Court

Dismissed the suit on 28 March 2024 on procedural grounds: the summons was too vague.

Climate Case Chart
What was the Shell claim over the Penguins FPSO boarding worth?
Company or project
Shell

Claimed damages of about £800,000 plus costs.

Communities and civil society
Greenpeace

Said the claim was worth up to $2.1 million.

Courts
Admiralty Court (settlement)

The claim ended in settlement on 10 December 2024: £300,000 to the RNLI, no admission of liability, 500-metre exclusion zones at Shell sites.

Brick Court Chambers
Were Resolute's racketeering claims and statements against Greenpeace upheld?
Company or project
Resolute Forest Products

Brought RICO claims against Greenpeace in the Northern District of California; its own account of the claims is not in the sources found.

Courts
US District Court, Northern District of California

Dismissed the RICO claims and 294 of 296 statements in January 2019, and the remaining claims in April 2023.

Communities and civil society
Greenpeace Canada

Announced on 26 April 2024 the conclusion of the long-running litigation with Resolute; a March 2013 HuffPost Canada item reports a Greenpeace Canada retraction concerning Resolute.

Greenpeace Canada

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • TotalEnergies declared 455 Mt CO2e of emissions for 2019.
    TotalEnergies
  • Greenpeace estimated about 1.64 Gt of emissions for TotalEnergies in 2019, in a November 2022 report.
    Greenpeace France
  • The Shell claim was worth up to $2.1 million.
    Greenpeace
  • The Resolute litigation had concluded (release headed "Resolute and Greenpeace parties announce the conclusion of long-running litigations").
    Greenpeace Canada · Greenpeace Canada

Recorded

  • 28 March 2024: the Paris Judicial Court dismissed TotalEnergies' suit against Greenpeace France on procedural grounds (summons too vague, Article 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
  • 10 December 2024: Shell's claim was settled. Greenpeace gave £300,000 to the RNLI, admitted no liability and accepted 500-metre exclusion zones at Shell sites for 5 or 10 years.
  • January 2019: the Northern District of California dismissed Resolute's RICO claims and 294 of 296 statements.
  • April 2020: Resolute was ordered to pay about $816,000 in fees under California's anti-SLAPP law (source: Greenpeace).
  • April 2023: Resolute's remaining claims were dismissed; Resolute appealed to the Ninth Circuit in May 2023.

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

  1. 2023–2024-03-28Dismissed
    TotalEnergies v Greenpeace France
    Paris Judicial Court · Civil · TotalEnergies → Greenpeace France

    Suit over a November 2022 Greenpeace report: TotalEnergies declared 455 Mt CO2e for 2019 and Greenpeace estimated about 1.64 Gt. TotalEnergies asked for the report's removal and €2,000 per day. The court dismissed the suit on procedural grounds because the summons was too vague (Article 54, Code of Civil Procedure). Climate Case Chart

  2. 2023-02–2024-12-10Settled£0.3m £300,000 given by Greenpeace to the RNLI under the settlement (millions)
    Shell v Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International (Penguins FPSO)
    Admiralty Court · Civil · Shell → Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International

    Claim over the boarding of the Penguins FPSO, for damages of about £800,000 plus costs (Greenpeace said up to $2.1 million). Settled on 10 December 2024: £300,000 to the RNLI, no admission of liability, 500-metre exclusion zones at Shell sites for 5 or 10 years. Brick Court Chambers

  3. unknown–2023-04Dismissed$0.82m About $816,000 in fees ordered against Resolute under California's anti-SLAPP law, April 2020 (source: Greenpeace) (millions)
    Resolute Forest Products v Greenpeace (RICO)
    US District Court, Northern District of California · Civil · Resolute Forest Products → Greenpeace

    January 2019: RICO claims dismissed together with 294 of 296 statements. April 2020: Resolute ordered to pay about $816,000 in fees under California's anti-SLAPP law. April 2023: remaining claims dismissed; Resolute appealed to the Ninth Circuit in May 2023 and the outcome was not found. On 26 April 2024 Greenpeace Canada announced the conclusion of the long-running litigation between the parties. Greenpeace Canada

Insurers

No insurer decision on record.

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

TotalEnergies 2019 emissions
455 Mt vs about 1.64 Gt
Declared by TotalEnergies vs estimated by Greenpeace; the Paris court dismissed the suit on procedural grounds
Shell suit settlement
£300,000
Paid by Greenpeace to the RNLI; 500-metre exclusion zones at Shell sites; no liability admitted
Resolute statements dismissed
294 of 296
January 2019, together with the RICO claims

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

Nature

  • Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.

Figures

  • Insufficient Costs awarded: Reported but not independently verified: costs awarded to Greenpeace in the TotalEnergies case.

Accounts

  • Disputed How large were TotalEnergies' 2019 emissions?
  • Disputed What was the Shell claim over the Penguins FPSO boarding worth?
  • Disputed Were Resolute's racketeering claims and statements against Greenpeace upheld?

Record

  • None on record The outcome of Resolute's Ninth Circuit appeal was not found.
  • None on record The terms on which the Resolute litigation concluded in April 2024 are not given in the sources found.
  • None on record The exclusion period under the Shell settlement is given as 5 or 10 years.
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: costs of €15,000 awarded to Greenpeace in the TotalEnergies case.

Did the harm stop?

Not applicable: the suits concerned a report, a vessel boarding and published statements, not a physical harm to land or water.

Who paid?

Greenpeace gave £300,000 to the RNLI in the Shell settlement. Resolute was ordered to pay about $816,000 in fees in April 2020, according to Greenpeace. No payment is recorded in the TotalEnergies case.

Sources

Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators✓ Courts✓ Press and investigations✓ Communities and civil society— Researchers✓ Standard-setters and registries

Press and investigations

  1. Greenpeace Canada Resolute retraction
    HuffPost Canada · 2013-03-20

Communities and civil society

Standard-setters and registries

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.

Law and courts

Arbitration
A private dispute process in which an appointed arbitrator, instead of a court, decides the case.

Science and environment

Hectare (ha)
A unit of area equal to 10,000 square metres, about 2.5 acres. 100 hectares make one square kilometre.

Insurance

Underwriter
An insurer, or a person at an insurer, who assesses a risk and decides whether and on what terms to insure it.