Landmark ruling in Greenpeace claim: Dutch government ordered to cut nitrogen pollution
On 22 January 2025, the District Court of the Hague issued a key ruling that could reshape government accountability for environmental protection. Following a collective action brought by Greenpeace, the Dutch state was ordered to take unprecedented nitrogen reduction measures, signalling a robust judicial approach to enforcing EU and Dutch environmental obligations.
Background
Nitrogen pollution arises from car traffic and industrial and agricultural practices. It can be harmful to health as well as animal and plant diversity.
Natura 2000 is a network of protected areas covering Europe’s most valuable and threatened species and habitats. It is the largest coordinated network of protected areas in the world.
The claim
The claim was brought by Greenpeace Nederland under the Act on the Settlement of Mass Damages Claims in Collective Actions (WAMCA), which enables a foundation (stichting) or association (vereniging) to seek declaratory or injunctive relief, as well as damages on behalf of a class of affected persons on an opt-out basis.
Greenpeace alleged that the Dutch state failed to take sufficient measures to lower the illegally high levels of nitrogen on Dutch Natura 2000 sites. It relied upon the EU Habitats Directive, transposed into Dutch law, which requires the government to prevent the deterioration of nature in Dutch Natura 2000 sites.
The judgment
The Court held that the EU Habitats Directive requires the Dutch state to prevent the deterioration of nature in Natura 2000 areas and to ensure the recovery of nature. It found that the government had not taken sufficient measures to prevent the threatened deterioration of nitrogen-sensitive Natura 2000 areas, failed to meet the statutory nitrogen targets for 2025 and was also on track to miss the 2030 targets.
The Court noted that during the oral arguments, the state provided an extensive summary of existing and proposed measures to cut nitrogen pollution, and the associated budgets. Nonetheless, the Court’s impression was that the Dutch state was in fact cutting its efforts for nitrogen reduction, particularly because the budget allocated to this had been reduced considerably, from EUR 25bn to EUR 5bn. It also noted that the government had not sought to claim that its new policies were likely to achieve the statutory nitrogen targets.
The Court therefore ordered the Dutch state to comply with the statutory nitrogen target for 2030, meaning that it must bring 50% of nitrogen-sensitive nature areas below the applicable standards by 31 December 2030 at the latest. In doing so, it must prioritise the most vulnerable Natura 2000 areas. If it fails to meet these obligations, the Dutch state must pay a EUR 10 million penalty to Greenpeace.
Next steps
The Dutch government has yet to respond officially to the ruling, but an appeal is likely. In considering its response, the Dutch state will need to balance its legal obligations and the threat of further legal challenges against a potential backlash from agricultural interests.
The ruling occurs against a backdrop of political tensions. In 2019, a Dutch crackdown on nitrogen emissions triggered mass farmer protests against anticipated herd reductions and farming standards. An organisation from the agricultural sector (Stikstof Claim) intervened in Greenpeace’s claim in support of the Dutch state, arguing that nitrogen regulations are detrimental to the agricultural sector.
In the meantime, the Court confirmed that the state must implement the judgment with immediate effect, including pending any judgment on appeal.
Implications
The case is notable for the EUR 10 million penalty that will become due if the Dutch state fails to comply. Dutch courts have generally declined to impose monetary penalties on the state for non-compliance. While small in absolute terms, this is an important signal from the judiciary that it will hold the government to its legal obligations.
Although the UK is not subject to the same EU regime, it also struggles with nitrogen pollution: 55% of England is designated as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone, with agriculture responsible for about 70% of nitrate in water and the UK’s nitrous oxide emissions. The UK government has also faced legal challenges to its handling of nitrogen pollution, with the Office for Environmental Protection urging immediate action on river pollution in January 2024 following a legal complaint submitted by WWF and ClientEarth in November 2022.
Finally, this case is the latest in a relatively novel wave of biodiversity-related litigation, which has so far been dwarfed by more specifically climate-change related cases but may be expected to become more prevalent in the coming years.