The amendment will impact current and future proceedings before the courts, including a case brought by climate campaigner Mike Smith against companies including Fonterra Co-operative Group, Genesis Energy, Z Energy and New Zealand Steel.
Smith’s case alleges that the companies’ emissions add to damage from climate change, creating a public nuisance for him and others. His case is due to be heard in the High Court next year, after the Supreme Court overruled a lower court decision to strike out the claims.
This ongoing litigation “is creating uncertainty in business confidence and investment that the government must address,” Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said Tuesday in Wellington.
The changes to the Climate Change Response Act will prevent findings of liability for tort for climate change damage or harm caused by greenhouse gas emissions, which is what Smith is seeking.
“Our government is committed to fixing the basics, and certainty of law is essential for businesses to operate, attracting overseas investment, and stimulating economic growth,” he said. “The government is acting now to provide legal clarity and certainty, and to remove the possible development of a new regime that contradicts the framework Parliament has already enacted to respond to climate change.”
The center-right government has faced criticism that it is soft on polluters by making policy choices that favor big companies and farmers. It has relaxed mandatory climate reporting rules and diluted the role of the Climate Change Commission citing the cost of compliance.
Greenpeace slammed the government for trying to protect polluting businesses from paying for the climate damage they have caused. Big firms are making profits as they damage the environment, while everyday people are paying the price through skyrocketing insurance premiums or the disruptions from climate-related weather events, it said in a statement.
“This is a shocking abuse of executive power,” spokesperson Gen Toop said in the statement. “The courts exist to hold powerful interests to account and protect the public interest. Ministers should not be rewriting the law to shut down cases they don’t like.”
Goldsmith said the response to climate change is best managed by the government “and not through piece-meal litigation in the courts.”
“The courts are not the right place to resolve claims of harm from climate change, and tort law is not well-suited to respond to a problem like climate change which involves a range of complex environmental, economic and social factors,” he said.
Photograph: Buildings in the central business district in Wellington, New Zealand, on Monday, Dec. 15, 2025. Photo credit: Mark Coote/Bloomberg
Copyright 2026 Bloomberg.
