Court case ends in settlement with Woodside and Greenpeace agreeing to foot their own bills

April 24, 2026, by Melisa Cavcic

Australian energy giant Woodside and Greenpeace Australia Pacific (GAP), an independent campaigning organization, have reached a settlement in an emissions lawsuit, which has now been dismissed in the Federal Court of Australia.

Woodside has confirmed that the Federal Court of Australia put an end to proceedings launched against it by Greenpeace Australia Pacific in December 2023. The proceedings, in which GAP challenged certain representations made by the Australian firm in relation to its climate strategy and emissions reduction targets, were dismissed with the consent of both parties, who will bear their own costs.

Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, commented: “Greenpeace Australia Pacific cares about transparent and accurate climate disclosures, and in December 2023, took Woodside to court challenging its claims. During the course of the case, Woodside changed how it was presenting its plans on carbon emissions from what they had said prior to us bringing this case. We take that as a win and have decided to continue the fight against fossil fuel corporations outside of the courts.

“Settling this case does not signal the end of our fight against Woodside’s climate and nature-destroying gas projects. While we may have agreed to resolve our court action against Woodside, in which we alleged it made misleading and deceptive claims to investors regarding its climate plans, the fact is the court of public opinion will judge Woodside for the harm it inflicts on our climate.”

When Greenpeace Australia Pacific filed its lawsuit against Woodside, it alleged that the company had misrepresented its prior emissions reductions and its emissions reduction targets for 2025, 2030, and 2050. The campaigners claimed, among other things, that the operator wrote its emissions reduction targets would achieve substantial cuts in actual scope 1 and 2 emissions, even though it would rely heavily on offsets to achieve a decrease in net emissions.

View on Offshore-energy.

Rafalowicz added: “Woodside’s greed-driven appetite to expand fossil fuel production is accelerating the climate crisis, putting the environment and communities at risk. Greenpeace strongly supports public interest litigation as a crucial tool in democratic engagement to protect our planet and holding large corporations accountable for their contributions to climate change.

“Investors and the public deserve accurate information about a company’s true climate impact and strategy, especially when those strategies are presented as ‘Paris-aligned’ — an absurd claim for a company responsible for one of the largest LNG export terminals in Australia, and now the United States.”

Greenpeace also stated that Woodside portrayed its emissions reduction targets as consistent with what the most recent climate science sets out as necessary to meet the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement, but its emissions reduction targets do not include scope 3 emissions, which account for over 90% of the firm’s emissions.

Since the Australian giant has plans to significantly expand its oil and gas production and processing, the campaigners point out that the sum of the company’s actual scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions would not materially decrease by 2030 and may increase past 2030.

Rafalowicz concluded: “The expansion of fossil fuels is incompatible with a 1.5C-aligned world — Greenpeace will continue to campaign to fast-track the transition to homegrown, clean, affordable wind and solar energy, the only solution to the energy crisis we are currently all facing globally.”