Cantonal Court of Zug No verdict yet on "climate lawsuit" against Holcim
It remains to be seen whether the Zug Cantonal Court will deal with the substance of the "climate lawsuit" against the cement company Holcim. The hearing on Wednesday on the fulfillment of the requirements for the trial concluded without a verdict.
03.09.2025, 08:46
22.12.2025, 06:26
SDA
The presiding judge said at the end of the hearing, which was held in the cantonal council chamber due to the high level of public interest, that the court would announce this in writing "in due course".
Three residents of the Indonesian island of Pari are demanding compensation from the Zug-based cement company, a significant reduction in CO2 emissions and participation in adaptation measures. They claim that the company is partly responsible for climate change, which they say is threatening the livelihoods on Pari.
Personal plea
Plaintiff Ibu Asmania, who was present, personally described the threat to her homeland and the future of future generations; her lawyer translated for those present. A second plaintiff, Arif Pujianto, was also present at the hearing.
The damage and costs incurred due to rising sea levels were not caused by the residents themselves, said Asmania. They lack the money to take measures.
If the sea level continues to rise as it has so far, the approximately 1,500 inhabitants will have to leave the island at the end of the century.
Holcim is partly responsible for this, the lawyer said in court. In its history, the company had emitted more than twice as much CO2 as the entire Swiss state. According to a study by the Climate Accountability Institute, the Group is responsible for 0.42 percent of global CO2 emissions since 1750. Holcim should therefore pay for this percentage of the costs incurred by the plaintiffs as a result of climate change.
They had a personal, practical and current interest in the lawsuit. They are therefore entitled to bring civil proceedings under Swiss law.
"Political process"
Holcim's lawyer took a completely different view. They argued that the plaintiffs were just as affected by climate change as the entire world population. However, there could be no question of a concrete interest worthy of protection. Moreover, the legislator is responsible for climate protection in Switzerland and a civil court cannot order any further measures.
Furthermore, nothing would change in the plaintiffs' situation "even if Holcim were to cease cement production altogether", according to the Holcim lawyer. Instead, another company would take over production - possibly in a country with less stringent requirements for climate protection measures. The reduction of CO2 emissions would have to be coordinated globally.
Holcim's representatives complained that the lawsuit against the company would lead to a purely "political process", backed by non-governmental organizations such as the aid organization of the Swiss Protestant Reformed Church (Heks).
According to Heks, it is supporting the lawsuit with a support and awareness-raising campaign and is organizing events in connection with the trial.
Waiting for the verdict
Ibu Asmania was quoted in a statement sent out by the Heks shortly after the end of the trial. "We are optimistic" about the court's pending decision. "After all, our existence is at stake."
In a statement to the media, the defendant company wrote that Holcim was determined to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, regardless of the decision. This is in line with the goal of the international Paris Climate Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.
The civil action against Holcim is a first for Swiss jurisdiction. Never before has a Swiss company been sued for its alleged responsibility for such climate damage.
