Pakistani Farmers Sue RWE, Heidelberg Over Flood
Thirty-nine farmers from Sindh province seek compensation in a German court for losses from the 2022 flooding.
Updated on Nov. 9, 2026 in Environmental
Live Poll
Should companies be held legally liable for climate damage caused by their emissions?
Thirty-nine farmers from Sindh province, Pakistan, filed a lawsuit in Germany against energy company RWE and building-materials maker Heidelberg Materials. The plaintiffs seek compensation for crop, livestock and home losses from the 2022 floods, which they attribute to the companies' emissions.
Why it matters
The case tests whether companies headquartered in Europe can be held liable in their home courts for climate-linked harms suffered abroad. The companies called the claims unfounded, and the lawsuit does not concern specific operations by either firm in Pakistan.
Plaintiffs estimate RWE accounts for 0.68% and Heidelberg Materials for 0.12% of global industrial emissions, while the 2022 flood killed 1,700 people and affected 30 million residents across about one-third of Pakistan. Whether those emissions materially contributed to the flood's intensity remains unresolved.
The players
RWE
RWE is a German energy company, one of the largest electricity producers in Europe, and a defendant in the lawsuit.
Heidelberg Materials
Heidelberg Materials is a German building-materials manufacturer known for cement and aggregates, and a defendant in the lawsuit.
The details
The farmers filed civil proceedings in a German court where the companies are headquartered, claiming the emissions intensified the torrential rains that destroyed crops, livestock and homes. One plaintiff, farmer Abdul Khaliq Laghari of Dadu district, lost an estimated $14,000 and 40 acres of crops, according to the extraction.
Timeline
2022: Large-scale flooding affected Pakistan, destroying farmers' crops and homes.
November 9, 2026: The farmers filed their lawsuit against RWE and Heidelberg Materials.
Big Picture
The 2022 Pakistan floods, which killed 1,700 people and affected 30 million residents, are now the basis for a civil claim against European emitters rather than only a disaster-relief matter. The case extends that event into the legal question of whether climate-linked harms can be pursued in the courts of companies' home countries.
The case signals that corporations' climate-related liability may increasingly be litigated in their home countries, a route that could affect how companies assess long-term environmental risk. For readers, the outcome could shape how future climate-related damage claims are pursued and who is expected to pay for them.
The takeaway
Climate litigation is expanding beyond the countries where emissions originate, and companies may face claims in their home courts for harms felt far away. Readers following climate policy should watch how this German case develops as a test of that approach.
Further reading
For related coverage of climate-linked harms and accountability, see Environmental reporting.
Source note: This article includes information reported by UA.
Live Poll
Should companies be held legally liable for climate damage caused by their emissions?
