In June 2026, Mike Smith (Ngāpuhi and Ngāti Kahu), the National Iwi Chairs Forum Pou Tikanga, Climate Clinic Aotearoa (a youth coalition), and Lawyers for Climate Action NZ submitted a complaint to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change, regarding the New Zealand Government's announcement of May 12, 2026. In the announcement, the Government announced its intention to amend the Climate Change Response Act 2002 to bar existing and future civil claims in tort for loss or harm arising from greenhouse gas emissions (the "Tort Prohibition").
The complainants assert that the Tort Prohibition would extinguish potential tort liability for greenhouse gas emissions, including in Mr Smith's ongoing proceeding against seven of New Zealand's largest corporate emitters, Smith v Fonterra, which the Supreme Court of New Zealand had reinstated and allowed to proceed to substantive trial following strike-out decisions in the lower courts.
The complaint raises concerns about procedural defects in the Government's decision-making and substantive inconsistencies with the rule of law, the separation of powers, and New Zealand's obligations under international human rights law, including the right of access to a court. This includes an assertion that the Tort Prohibition is inconsistent with the rights of persons belonging to minorities to enjoy their own culture under Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, given the centrality of tikanga to Smith v Fonterra. It is further asserted that the Tort Prohibition is inconsistent with New Zealand's stringent due diligence obligations to protect the climate system, being a necessary precondition of the exercise and enjoyment of human rights as articulated by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of July 23, 2025, including through the regulation of private actors within the State's jurisdiction.
- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- Smith, Climate Clinic Aotearoa, National Iwi Chairs Forum Pou Tikanga and Lawyers for Climate Action NZ v New Zealand
Smith, Climate Clinic Aotearoa, National Iwi Chairs Forum Pou Tikanga and Lawyers for Climate Action NZ v New Zealand
Geography
International
Year
2026
Document Type
Litigation
About this case
Filing year
2026
Status
Pending
Geography
International
Court/admin entity
United Nations → UN Special Procedures → United Nations Special Rapporteurs
Case category
Suits against governments (Global) → Human Rights (Global) → Indigenous Groups (Global)
Principal law
International Law → International Covenant on Civil and Political RightsInternational Law → International Human Rights LawInternational Law → UNFCCC → Paris Agreement
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
Search results
06/18/2026
In June 2026, Mike Smith (Ngāpuhi and Ngāti Kahu), the National Iwi Chairs Forum Pou Tikanga, Climate Clinic Aotearoa (a youth coalition), and Lawyers for Climate Action NZ submitted a complaint to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change, regarding the New Zealand Government's announcement of May 12, 2026. In the announcement, the Government announced its intention to amend the Climate Change Response Act 2002 to bar existing and future civil claims in tort for loss or harm arising from greenhouse gas emissions (the "Tort Prohibition").
The complainants assert that the Tort Prohibition would extinguish potential tort liability for greenhouse gas emissions, including in Mr Smith's ongoing proceeding against seven of New Zealand's largest corporate emitters, Smith v Fonterra, which the Supreme Court of New Zealand had reinstated and allowed to proceed to substantive trial following strike-out decisions in the lower courts.
The complaint raises concerns about procedural defects in the Government's decision-making and substantive inconsistencies with the rule of law, the separation of powers, and New Zealand's obligations under international human rights law, including the right of access to a court. This includes an assertion that the Tort Prohibition is inconsistent with the rights of persons belonging to minorities to enjoy their own culture under Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, given the centrality of tikanga to Smith v Fonterra. It is further asserted that the Tort Prohibition is inconsistent with New Zealand's stringent due diligence obligations to protect the climate system, being a necessary precondition of the exercise and enjoyment of human rights as articulated by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of July 23, 2025, including through the regulation of private actors within the State's jurisdiction.
Press Release
–
Summary
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
Impacted group
Just transition
Greenhouse gas