- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States of America
- /
- Anew Ventures II, LLC v. Terra Global Investment Management, LLC
Anew Ventures II, LLC v. Terra Global Investment Management, LLC
Geography
Year
2025
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
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).
Geography
Docket number
2025-0774
Court/admin entity
United States → State Courts → Delaware Court of Chancery (Del. Ch.)
Case category
Carbon Offsets and Credits (US) → Commercial (US)
Principal law
United States → Contract Law
At issue
Document with title of Anew Ventures II, LLC v. Terra Global Investment Management, LLC
Topics
, ,
Documents
Each case in our database can contain one or more documents.
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
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).
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.
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 lawsuit 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
–
07/07/2025
Complaint filed.
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.
Complaint
–
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
See how often Topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document.
Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Economic sector
Finance