Timeline
Follow the journey of Smith v Fonterra through the New Zealand courts
The Case Is Filed
Mike Smith files proceedings against major corporate emitters
Mike Smith files proceedings in the High Court of New Zealand against major corporate emitters, including Fonterra. The claim argues that excessive greenhouse-gas emissions are causing serious harm to people, land, culture, and future generations. It proposes that existing legal principles — and potentially a new climate-related tort — should apply to this harm. This was one of the first cases globally to ask a court to directly confront climate change using common-law duties, rather than relying solely on legislation.
First Court Decision (High Court)
High Court strikes out traditional claims but allows novel climate tort
The High Court strikes out two traditional legal claims (public nuisance and negligence). Crucially, the Court allows the novel climate tort claim to remain alive, recognising it is not "plainly untenable." The Court acknowledged that climate change may require new legal thinking, even if the claim faced significant hurdles.
Case Shut Down on Appeal
Court of Appeal strikes out all claims
The Court of Appeal strikes out all claims, including the proposed new tort. This effectively ends the case unless the Supreme Court intervenes. The decision reflected judicial caution about courts entering climate policy territory. Many believed this was the end of the case.
Supreme Court Takes the Case
Supreme Court grants leave to appeal
The Supreme Court grants leave to appeal, signalling the issues raised are of national and international importance. Supreme Court hearings of this nature are rare, and global climate lawyers, academics, and advocates closely followed the case.
Supreme Court Hearing
Supreme Court hears appeal over three full days
The Supreme Court hears the appeal over three full hearing days. Arguments focus on: whether climate harm can be addressed by common law, whether courts have a role alongside Parliament, and whether the case should be allowed to go to trial at all.
Supreme Court Breakthrough
Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal
The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal. The Court reinstates the statement of claim and confirms the case must proceed to trial. Importantly, the Court stresses: this decision is not about whether Smith will ultimately win, it is about allowing the law to be tested in light of the climate crisis. This is widely regarded as a historic climate judgment. The Court confirms that climate change can be a matter for the courts and the common law is capable of evolution. The decision is cited internationally as a major development in climate litigation.
Case Returns to High Court
High Court hears procedural applications
The case returns to the High Court. The Court hears procedural applications about: how the trial should be structured, whether it should be split into stages, and how complex evidence should be managed.
High Court Interlocutory Judgment
15-week trial confirmed
The High Court issues an interlocutory judgment: declines a split trial, confirms the case will proceed as a single, full merits trial, and sets down a 15-week trial. This confirms the case will be heard in full, with evidence from science, tikanga Māori, economics, and climate impacts considered together. It signals the Court's readiness to engage deeply with the substance of the claims.
Trial Scheduled
15-week High Court trial to begin
15-week High Court trial scheduled to begin. This will be one of the longest and most significant climate trials ever held in New Zealand. The trial will address: whether major emitters owe duties to avoid causing climate harm, whether their emissions have materially contributed to that harm, and what responsibility corporations bear for climate impacts already underway.
Where the Case Stands Now
Supreme Court victory securing the right to a trial
Claims fully reinstated
Trial structure confirmed
Trial scheduled for April 2027
Why This Case Matters Beyond New Zealand
It tests whether common law can respond to the climate crisis
It centres Indigenous leadership and intergenerational justice
It is being watched by courts, lawyers, and governments worldwide
Its outcome could influence climate accountability far beyond Aotearoa