AMSTERDAM/SYDNEY, Wednesday 2 July 2025 – In a first, landmark test case of the European Union’s new legislation to protect freedom of expression and stop abusive lawsuits, Greenpeace International today challenges the US oil pipeline company, Energy Transfer, in court in the Netherlands.
The multi-billion-dollar company brought two back-to-back SLAPP suits (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) against Greenpeace International and Greenpeace in the US, after showing solidarity with the 2016 peaceful Indigenous-led protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The first case was dismissed, but the Greenpeace organisations continue to defend against the second case, which is ongoing, after a North Dakota jury recently awarded over $660 million USD (more than $1 billion AUD) in damages to the pipeline giant.
Activists from Greenpeace International and allies were present outside the courthouse in Amsterdam today for the first hearing in the case with a big banner reading “ENERGY TRANSFER, WELCOME TO THE EU – WHERE FREE SPEECH IS STILL A THING”.
Mads Flarup Christensen, Executive Director, Greenpeace International, said:
“Energy Transfer’s attack on our right to protest is an attack on everyone’s free speech. Greenpeace has been the target of threats, arrests and even bombs over the last 50 years and persevered. We will continue to resist all forms of intimidation and explore every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for this attempt at abusing the justice system. This groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case against Energy Transfer in the Netherlands is just the beginning of defeating this bullying tactic being wielded by billionaires and fossil fuel giants trying to silence critics all over the world. Something absolutely vital is at stake here: people’s ability to hold corporate polluters to account for the devastation they’re causing.”
Katrina Bullock, General Counsel, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“SLAPPs are a weapon used to bully peaceful climate defenders and strangle public debate. They twist the legal system to shield powerful polluters from scrutiny. The EU’s new anti-SLAPP laws provide a crucial safeguard for the fundamental right to free speech. Greenpeace International’s case against Energy Transfer shows how anti-SLAPP laws can be a powerful tool to restore justice and protect those who speak up in the public interest. Australia urgently needs similar anti-SLAPP laws to ensure communities, journalists, and advocates can challenge powerful interests without fear of retaliation.
“In the Santos case last year, a major fossil fuel corporation used aggressive legal tactics against a charity and Traditional Owners seeking to protect Country from a harmful gas project. Santos went so far as to seek internal documents from charities that voiced support for the case potentially to pursue them for costs. It relentlessly pursued costs orders against the Tiwi Islanders’ legal team. These intimidation tactics appear designed to create a chilling effect on public interest litigation, undermining democracy and silencing those who stand up for people and the planet.
The real threat here is not communities or their lawyers, but the damaging activities of fossil fuel corporations that are accelerating climate change and putting a safe, sustainable future for all Australians at risk.”
In Australia, the ACT is the only jurisdiction with anti-SLAPP laws.
At the time of the press release it was still uncertain whether Energy Transfer would appear in the hearing. The next steps are for the judge to agree on a schedule for the case.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific is an autonomous legal entity and is not a party to the lawsuit.
– ENDS –
Notes:
Photos and videos are available in the Greenpeace Media Library here
The new EU rules are aimed at addressing the growing number of abusive lawsuits against journalists, media outlets, environmental activists and human rights defenders. EU Member States have until 7 May 2026 at the latest to transpose the rules into their national laws, but the Dutch government has indicated that the Directive’s protections can already be applied under existing Dutch legal frameworks.
Energy Transfer’s lawsuits in the US are clear-cut examples of SLAPP suits — a type of lawsuit that aims to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent. Big Oil companies Shell, Total, and ENI have also filed SLAPPs against Greenpeace entities in recent years. Some of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks.
