Netherlands ordered by court to reduce nitrogen emissions by 2030

On 22 January 2025, the Hague District Court issued its decision in Greenpeace Nederland v. the Dutch State, ruling among other things that the Dutch Government was acting unlawfully in failing to take adequate action in relation to nitrogen pollution and that it must intensify its efforts to meet its statutory nitrogen targets.

The class action was started in July 2023 by Greenpeace, which argued that:

• the Government was failing to address excessive nitrogen emissions from intensive farming, fertilizer use, traffic, and construction in line with its EU obligations in relation to Natura 2000 protected zones; and
• the Dutch State was more generally not on track to meet its various nitrogen reduction targets for 2025 and 2030.

On its side, the State argued that the judiciary was not an adequate forum to determine what measures were suitable to achieve these obligations and that this matter should be left to the legislature. The State was also joined by an interest organisation, Stikstof Claim, representing the interests of farmers and seeking to carve out nitrogen regulations which it considers are detrimental to the agricultural sector.

The Hague District Court found in favour of Greenpeace and emphasised the State's obligations to comply with its own statutory targets. The Court also imposed an exceptional fine of €10 million (something rarely done against the Dutch State) which will inure if the nitrogen reduction target for 2030 is not met. This unusual measure highlights the Court's concern that nitrogen targets will continue to be missed.

The State now has the option to appeal, but this would not suspend the immediate obligations from the District Court judgment pending a successful appeal.

This case follows a line of similar NGO-driven litigation against the Dutch Government, including Urgenda Foundation v Kingdom of the Netherlands (which related to GHG emissions), as well as against other governments around the world. This is becoming an increasingly present feature of the climate litigation landscape and is expected to continue in coming years.