ClientEarth v. European Investment Bank

In ClientEarth v. European Investment Bank, the environmental NGO ClientEarth sued the European Investment Bank (EIB) for rejecting ClientEarth's petition for an internal review of the EIB's involvement with a biomass power plant. The case was within the European Union General Court and was ultimately decided in favor of ClientEarth.

Background
In 2018, the EIB provided a 60 million euro loan to Spain for the construction of a 50-megawatt biomass power plant. ClientEarth submitted a request for an internal review of the decision because the organization believed there was an overestimation of environmental advantages associated with biomass and the EIB ignored the potential risks of logging and fire emissions. The EIB rejected the petition because the decision wasn't under environmental law as stated in the Aarhus Convention. On January 8, 2019, ClientEarth filed suit against the EIB and the case went to the EU General Court. ClientEarth argued that the EIB misinterpreted the Aarhus Convention and violated it by rejecting their petition for review.

Relevant Law and Principles

 * Aarhus Convention
 * European Union

Status
On January 27, 2021, the EU General Court ruled in favor of ClientEarth and mandated the EIB to do the review. The Court found that the decision was under environmental law because all acts of public authorities which may violate environmental law, regardless of whether the institution is formed by environmental law, should be subject to internal review.

Takeaways
This case was an important step in holding non-governmental institutions accountable for funding projects damaging to the planet, even if not directly involved. The economic involvement in climate change is extremely critical for making valuable change, so this case showed the potential economic or other risks in financing projects with high emissions.

Links

 * ClientEarth
 * European Investment Bank
 * EU General Court Decision