Essay by Eric Worrall
NGOs should be helping these people put their lives back together. Instead, they appear to be encouraging wild fantasies of a big payday.
Filipino typhoon survivors sue Shell over climate change
London (AFP) – Survivors of a deadly 2021 typhoon in the Philippines have filed a lawsuit against British oil giant Shell, seeking financial compensation for climate-related devastation, three NGOs supporting them said Thursday.
Issued on: 11/12/2025 – 08:02 Modified: 11/12/2025 – 08:00
Typhoon Rai struck the southern and central regions of the Philippines in December 2021, toppling power lines and trees and unleashing deadly floods that killed over 400 people and left hundreds of thousands homeless.
The lawsuit on behalf of 103 survivors argues Shell’s carbon emissions contributed to climate change, impacting Philippine communities.
Trixy Elle, a plaintiff from a fishing community whose home and four boats were swept away in the typhoon, told AFP the lawsuit was about getting justice.
“Island residents like us contribute only a small percentage of pollution. But who gets the short stick? The poor like us,” said the 34-year-old, who is still paying off high-interest loans she needed to rebuild.
“I am not speaking only for my community but for all Filipinos who experience the effects of climate crises,” Elle said, adding that her now 13-year-old son still suffers from trauma caused by the storm.
…
Read more: https://www.rfi.fr/en/international-news/20251211-filipino-typhoon-survivors-sue-shell-over-climate-change
NGOs could simply ask companies like Shell to assist with rebuilding these communities. Companies like Shell spend substantial money every year helping people in need.
Instead they’ve convinced these people to waste time and effort on a high risk lawsuit, which even if they win will take many years to resolve.
If the claimants won, it would, excuse the turn of phrase, open the flood gates.
Clearly baseless. Can’t be allowed to happen.
But UK judges? God help us.
Why UK?
Isn’t Shell a Dutch company?
Shell has a complicated corporate structure, which includes UK and The Netherlands.
My search efforts are letting me down this morning – among the dozen or so others about this lawsuit, I can’t find any which link straight to an online copy of the lawsuit. I can’t even find it in the UK High Court pages. I’d like to read the whole thing, given that the law firm handling it is Hausfeld LLP, because my educated guess is how it may actually be that Hausfeld LLP, which I already know a little bit about in U.S. “ExxonKnew” court cases.
More info/links here?
https://www.hausfeld.com/en-gb/news/survivors-of-deadly-philippines-super-typhoon-take-shell-to-court-over-climate-harms
That’s the link in my second one in my comment above. Unless I missed it within Hausfeld’s own website there (I even tried a site-specific search within it to see if any other pages mentioning Shell had links to the lawsuit filing itself), they’re not sharing their own lawsuit text with the public.
Continued searching finally turns up the actual name of the lawsuit and its case number here – “Casquejo and others v Shell plc.” Now, from that I just need to find the lawsuit’s complete text.
This has nothing to do with helping people but with propaganda and indoctrination.
As Shell isn’t one of the 3 top producing oil companies, the question is:Why Shell?
The top producers are Arab and Chinese.But as they are not part of the standard white/western guilt scenario.
And while it is impossible to proof Shells(or any other companies guilt),
the singling out of a single perpetrator is quite arbitrary and discriminating.
Then there is reality:
Years ago(just a short time after predicting hurricane “unlike anything you’ve ever seen before”)
the Washington Pest admitted that there is a unprecedented hurricane drought(“and why it is a bad thing” – never forget a negative spin when talking climate).
This year they had to admitt that there was not a single hurricane landfall and the WaPo called it
” weird and troubling.”
This is complemented on the Asian side by
Nature ‘s article called: ” Decreasing trend in destructive typhoons in South Indian Oceans”
and even NOAA ” Global Warming(= standard weather) contributed to a 13% decline in tropical storms ”
Of course something has to compensate for the decrease in storms,
therefore the remaining few has to become more violent as result of the propaganda game.
Nature doesn’t even know that typhoons only happen in the western Pacific, never in the “South Indian Ocean”.
But then Nature doesn’t know very much about anything.
It has nothing to do with helping people, propaganda or indoctrination. It has everything to do with a few lawyers, if successful, who will collect many $millions from their “share” (30%, 50% or more) of any settlement or court award. The only principal involved here is greed as it almost always is with any lawsuit.
The “Integrated atmospheric column kinetic energy” over any given square meter is on the order of a couple of thousand watts and highly variable….a typhoon wind several kilowatts…it will be very difficult for a lawyer to show that 3 or 4 watts of CO2 forcing on that column was responsible for making the typhoon “destructive”…A few expert heat transfer, fluid mechanics, and thermodynamics engineers called as witnesses will turn their case into horse apples quite quickly.
graphic courtesy D. Dibbell and ERA5
I think that’s part of their trick.
They have not chosen by coincidence a domain ( weather)
where a single butterfly swing is supposed to create a storm and where minor deviations within the calculation can cause very different outcomes.
And an increase of 3 -4 watts is a behemoth compared to a butterfly swing.
On the other hand they can not predict/detect a hurricane with the power of 10000 nuclear bombs right in front of their noses, yet they know that Shell intensified a Philippino hurricane, while at the same time there is a hurricane drought in the US (shouldn’t Shell then be rewarded for this by woke logic ?)
Yeah, that’s it. If Shell made the storm(s) more intense, then Shell should sue the insurance companies in the U.S. for all the money it saved them by preventing a year of destruction and mayhem. Just look at the hurricane rider on Florida home insurance policies..we should demand a rebate for 2025’s exhorbinant bill.
What do you say?
Gums dreams…
Nitpick: Watts are a unit of power, need time to express energy.
To the ‘clown show’ that runs this gambit EVERYTHING is a sign of ‘global warming’, things getting worse ‘global warming’, things getting better “global warming and watch out it’ll change for SURE”. This is all just a big show to deflect responsibility from the powers that be from not protecting/warning their citizens in time to prepare, plus graft for people who couldn’t get a real job if their life depended on it.
From the article: “The lawsuit on behalf of 103 survivors argues Shell’s carbon emissions contributed to climate change, impacting Philippine communities.”
They could not prove this if their lives depended on doing so.
Assumptions are not proof of anything, and that is all they have: Assumptions. No proof of anything.
A good judge would not accept presenting assumptions as established facts, because they are not. A judge’s job is to discern what is fact and what is not.
Unfortunately,we have a lot of judges who are political creatues nowadays, who think their political ideology supersedes whether the facts are actually established or not, when it comes to things like alleged Human-caused Climate Change.
It is quite easy to see that there are no established facts with regard to CO2 being a control knob of the Earth’s temperatures, or that CO2 has any effect on any particular weather event. The Climate Alarmists have absolutely no evidence backing up such claims. None, whatsoever. That would be easy to establish: Just ask the Climate Alarmists to provide their evidence. They don’t have any. All they have is speculation and assumptions. These are not established facts.
An honest, clear thinking judge, would throw this case out of court for lack of evidence.
But, but, but, the “science is settled” and “scientists say…”
/s
With respect and apologies, corrected this statement for you…
A good judge
wouldshould not accept presenting assumptions as established facts, because they are not. A judge’s jobis toshould be discern what is fact and what is not.Copilot AI tells us that there are names associated with this practice …
My question, “Is there a name for individuals or groups who finance lawsuits as ‘investments’?”
Litigation Finance / Litigation Funding The broad industry term for providing capital to plaintiffs or law firms to pursue lawsuits, with repayment contingent on the outcome.
Third‑Party Litigation Funding (TPLF) A more technical/legal phrase often used in court discussions and policy debates.
Legal Financing / Lawsuit Funding Sometimes used interchangeably, though in the U.S. “lawsuit funding” can also refer to consumer cash advances for personal injury plaintiffs.
… as well as names for the investors.
Litigation Funders The most common label for individuals or firms who provide the capital.
Legal Finance Firms Specialized companies (like Burford Capital or Omni Bridgeway) that treat lawsuits as investment assets.
Alternative Investment Managers In financial circles, litigation funding is sometimes grouped with private equity or hedge fund strategies.
Claim Investors (less common) Refers to those who treat legal claims as tradable assets.
Like I said, greed, and well organized greed as you point out.
When asked why he robbed banks, Willie Sutton replied “Because that’s where the money is”. Same thing here, and while not exactly robbery, the morality it stoops to is on a par.
Oil companies should IMMEDIATELY stop providing petroleum based products to anyone who brings these lawsuits.
These people were using petroleum product.. so legally, they must surely have to include themselves in the baseless lawsuit.
But, but, but, the amount they use and the CO2 they emit is miniscule compared to these evil oil giants.
/s
“These people were using petroleum product.. so legally, they must surely have to include themselves in the baseless lawsuit.”
Yes. From the article: “Island residents like us contribute only a small percentage of pollution. But who gets the short stick? The poor like us,”
So the logic goes something like this: “I only killed 3 people. That company killed 30, so only they should be penalized.”
Shell makes the stuff for them..
Shell uses fuel to get the fuel to them.
Trixie has 4 boats..
wow, I only have a little 3m Tuffy with a small motor.
I wonder…. what fuel did they run on ?? !
Any sensible UK judge should refuse to hear this case on the grounds that the majority of the world’s CO2 emissions come from China and India, territories that are outside the jurisdiction of UK courts. The plaintiffs could always try their luck in the courts in Beijing and/or Delhi.
if one refuses to hear the case it doesnt stop the case, we should take it to court and obliterate the baseless claim, it works well in terms of case lawi
There’s the fault in your logic right there…
Can I have some of your money?
I have none. I have nothing and am told to be happy.
They’re angling for a settlement, rather than a judgement, surely?
Story tip: Die Hard edition
EU: Plans to impose an effective ban on selling new cars with combustion engines in the European Union have reportedly been abandoned. – Independent
UK: Number 10 has insisted it will not change course on its ban of all new petrol and diesel cars from 2030, even as its pals in Brussels prepare to reverse course after pressure from Germany and Italy. – Guido
It should be a crime against humanity, playing with people’s lives like this.
How can these foolish people prove there is a connection between the typhoon and the drilling by Shell? They only can in a foolish court with disingenuous lawyers.
maybe its time for everyone here involved at a scientific level to provides amicus briefs ?
For non-lawyer types: “An amicus brief (short for amicus curiae brief) is a legal document filed by a non-party (an “amicus curiae” or “friend of the court”) to assist a court by offering additional information, expertise, or arguments relevant to a case, especially when the decision has broad public interest, like civil rights or economic impacts. These briefs support a specific side or offer a neutral perspective, aiming to influence the court’s decision by highlighting broader implications or unique knowledge, and generally require court permission to file.”
Hurricane melissa was tied for 3rd as the most powerful hurricane on record. It was tied with the 1935 Labor Day hurricane that hit Florida. So, what caused the earlier hurricanes? Obviously CO2 went through a time warp, globally. /s
Melissa “rapidly” strengthened just before landfall to Cat 5. This is blamed on “climate change” that made the waters warmer, therefore more cyclone energy (it is falsely claimed that only ocean water temperature is responsible).
As it traversed Jamaica, it downgraded to Cat 4, which is normal over land, then Cat 3 when it reached the water. It continued to downgrade as it progressed.
Where it crossed Jamaica is about 35 miles wide. The island is about 150 miles long. So the conundrum is, if “climate change” was heating the ocean and that caused it to become powerful, why when Melissa hit water again did it not re-energize to Cat 5?
This whole thing, the lawsuit, is bogus.
“…
shouldclaiming to be helping these people put their lives back together. Instead, they appear to be encouraging wild fantasies of a big payday.”It’s not just NGOs, you know.
There may come a point in the future where NGOs will join the ranks of banes to civilization.
Defendant’s attorney:
“Your honor, I would like the jury to consider the fact that not a single one of the 103 plaintiffs in this case has avoiding using, directly or indirectly, fossil fuels during their lifetime and by doing so they are guilty of the same charge—emitting “carbon emissions” into the atmosphere—as they are now bringing against the defendants in this case.
“Ego, I request an immediate, summary dismissal of this case with prejudice.”
Plaintiffs:
“Your honor, we weren’t sure that fossil fuels caused climate change before we experienced this storm”.
Judge:
Well – CASE DISMISSED.
(and now you can be SURE that fossil fuels don’t cause climate change)
Next case!
Each plaintiff exhales ca. 1 kilogram of CO2 every day. Add to this the CO2 exhaled by pets and any other domestic animals ranging from cattle to canaries.
Sue them . . . sue them all!
/sarc
My last sentence BAD . . . obviously “Ergo”, not “Ego”. Onset of typos with advancing age 🙁
The UK and Canada governments have been controlling the weather for years, they say.
Are they named in the court action.
“The deadly 2021 typhoon in the Philippines was Typhoon Rai, known locally as Odette, which struck the central and southern regions in mid-December, becoming one of the strongest and costliest storms to hit the country, causing over 400 deaths, widespread destruction, power outages, and massive displacement, with survivors recently filing lawsuits against Shell over climate change impacts.”
Can I file a countersuit because my toes are cold?
I don’t want to equate one human having cold toes with four human deaths – Shell bears about the same level of responsibility for both.
Better to be an American corporation and have American law protection from greedy NGOs.
Judges in these cases should be made aware that not too long ago, and for similar reasons, women were accused of witchcraft, convicted, and put to death by various innovative methods.
There seems no end to stupidity yet intelligence is in short supply indeed!
Money grubbing bottom feeders. Before any of these people set foot in a courtroom they should be forbidden from using fossil fuel in any form, especially the NGOs.
“Trixy Elle, a plaintiff from a fishing community whose home and four boats were swept away in the typhoon”
Four boats and probably the house would use fossil fuels for many purposes so Trixy is contributing to the cause of what she is complaining about.
Perhaps she could be compensated with a wood-burning stove and some non fossil fuel-based sails
Charlatans do what charlatans do but they won’t win this one. The reputation of NGO’s is worthless because the profession has become infiltrated with agitators, usurpers, and western spooks. These NGO’s are probably hoping for another payday before the ‘climate change’ wheels come off the gravy train. By the time this case gets to court the train will be wrecked. I can bet that the older people there don’t believe a word.