TotalEnergies v Greenpeace France (SLAPP case)

In November 2022, Greenpeace France published a report named “‘TotalEnergies' carbon footprint: accounts are not good”. In this report, Greenpeace France accused the French oil company TotalEnergies of under-reporting emissions in 2019. While TotalEnergies declared 455 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2019 in its carbon balance, Greenpeace France believed TotalEnergies' core activities had generated around 1.64 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. On April 28, 2023, TotalEnergies filed a lawsuit against Greenpeace France for violating Article L. 465-3-2 of the Monetary and Financial Code, which prohibits any person from disseminating false or misleading information about a listed company. TotalEnergies argued that Greenpeace France disseminated false and misleading information on its carbon footprint, which was allegedly prejudicial to the Company as a listed company. TotalEnergies asked the civil judge to force Greenpeace France to remove the report from its website and any other medium and to cease all communication relating to it, under a fine of 2,000 euros per day. TotalEnergies also requested for compensation for its damage 1 symbolic euro. On March 28, 2024, the Paris Judicial Court dismissed TotalEnergies' SLAPP against Greenpeace France, declaring it "null". - The Court deemed the summons too vague to allow Greenpeace France to effectively defend itself on the merits. Under Article 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a summons drafted in vague terms and failing to identify the alleged faults is null to the extent that the defendant is unable to grasp the object of the claims against them and thus defend themselves effectively. Additionally, the summons must be sufficiently precise, without the defendant having to "search through the documents" for the exact nature of the grievances against them. The Court decided that no clarification is provided by TotalEnergies regarding the definition of “other false and misleading information”. In addition, the Court considered that TotalEnergies merely highlighted some of the "multiple" errors allegedly committed by Greenpeace France: these "faults" are formulated in vague terms, while repeatedly indicating that the "false or misleading information" identified is not exhaustive. The Court declared that the imprecision of the summons not only concerns the targeted information but also the platforms through which they were disseminated. As a result, the judge declared the nullity of the summons issued by TotalEnergies. - Furthermore, the Court ordered TotalEnergies to pay 15,000 euros to Greenpeace France for costs incurred for the procedure (article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure).