Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database

Anew Ventures II, LLC v. Terra Global Investment Management, LLC

About this case

Filing year
2025
Status
Opposition filed by plaintiff to motion for clarification of, or limited relief from, temporary restraining order (public version filed on November 6, 2025).
Docket number
2025-0774
Court/admin entity
United StatesState CourtsDel. Ch.
Case category
Carbon Offsets and CreditsCommercial
Principal law
United StatesContract Law
At issue
Investor's action to enjoin emergency arbitration regarding investor's termination of its agreement with the defendants after a pooled fund to generate carbon credits failed to generate credits.
Topics
,

Documents

Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics 
Beta
Search results
10/29/2025
Opposition filed by plaintiff to motion for clarification of, or limited relief from, temporary restraining order (public version filed on November 6, 2025).
Opposition
07/11/2025
Temporary restraining order granted.
The Delaware Court of Chancery granted a motion by an investor in a pooled fund to generate carbon credits for a temporary restraining order (TRO) enjoining the defendants from participating in emergency arbitration before the International Chamber of Commerce while the Delaware Superior Court adjudicates the defendants’ motion to dismiss the investor’s <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/anew-ventures-ii-llc-v-terra-global-investment-management-llc-2/">lawsuit</a> seeking to vindicate its termination of its agreement with the defendants after the pooled fund failed to generate carbon credits. In granting the TRO blocking arbitration, the Chancery Court found that the primary factor of imminent and irreparable harm was present because being compelled to arbitrate absent an agreement to do so is an irreparable injury. Although the defendants argued that an ongoing and anticipated project would suffer immediate harm absent the investor’s capital, the Chancery Court stated that it was “dubious” that harm was imminent, particularly with regard to the anticipated project, and also that the defendants did not explain why monetary damages would be insufficient to remedy any harm to the defendants. The Chancery Court therefore found that the balance of equities favored granting the TRO. The court also found that the investor cleared the “low threshold” of asserting a “colorable claim” that the dispute was not subject to arbitration.
Decision

Summary

Investor's action to enjoin emergency arbitration regarding investor's termination of its agreement with the defendants after a pooled fund to generate carbon credits failed to generate credits.

 Topics mentioned most in this case  
Beta

See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more

Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Economic sector