Filipino Families Sue Shell Over Typhoon Deaths in Landmark UK Climate Case

Over 100 Filipino survivors of a devastating 2021 typhoon are pursuing legal action against Shell in London's Royal Courts of Justice, in what could become a precedent-setting case linking fossil fuel companies to specific climate disasters.

The claimants seek compensation for deaths, injuries and property destruction caused by Super Typhoon Rai, which killed nearly 400 people across the Philippines in December 2021. Their legal team argues that Shell's greenhouse gas emissions contributed to climate conditions that made the storm more destructive.

Among the survivors is Trixy Elle, whose family was forced to "swim for our lives" when storm surges engulfed their island home. Speaking from the central Philippines, Ms Elle described the unprecedented intensity of the typhoon.

"We usually experience signal number one, number two," she explained, referring to the Philippines' storm warning system. "But this was signal number five, and we had not experienced it yet."

Unprecedented Storm Surge

As the typhoon struck on 16 December 2021, Ms Elle watched seawater rise rapidly around her family's home on their small island.

"We noticed the waves were high, going above the roof," she recalled. "The water came from the window, through the wood, through the door."

When the family attempted to evacuate, they were caught by the surge. "My father said to hold our hands together. If we die, we die together," Ms Elle remembered. "We cannot walk, so we have to swim. Swim in the middle of nowhere with the big waves, strong winds, heavy rains."

The family's home was destroyed, leaving them isolated without assistance for days. "Because we live on an island, we're isolated. No help comes for many days, no food, no water," she said.

Legal Challenge Tests Corporate Accountability

The lawsuit represents the first major transnational civil case attempting to directly link an oil company's emissions to personal injury and loss in the developing world. Legal experts suggest it could establish important precedents for corporate climate liability.

Danilo Garrido, representing Greenpeace in the case, told reporters that Shell bears responsibility for "over two per cent of all historic global carbon emissions." The case will argue that Shell "knew of their role in causing climate change since 1965 at the latest, but still continued to increase investment in fossil fuels."

The legal action relies on climate attribution science, which examines how global warming affects the likelihood and intensity of extreme weather events. A 2025 analysis by Imperial College London and the University of Sheffield found that storms like Typhoon Rai have become "significantly more likely and intense due to anthropogenic climate change."

Shell Rejects Claims

Shell has dismissed the lawsuit as "baseless," arguing it will not help tackle climate change or reduce emissions. A company spokesperson said: "The suggestion that Shell had unique knowledge about climate change is simply not true. The issue has been part of public discussion and scientific research for many decades."

The company emphasised that it is "reducing emissions from operations and helping customers to reduce theirs, as we provide the vital energy needed today and in the future."

Shell has previously argued that the majority of its reported emissions come from consumer use of its products rather than its own operations.

Growing Climate Threat

For Ms Elle, the case represents both accountability and hope for the future. "If we remain in silence, if we do not do something today, what will happen to our future, especially me? I have children," she said.

She noted the increasing frequency of severe storms in the Philippines: "Before, superstorms were very rare. But now it seems normal. The frequency, the intensity, is not really normal."

The case, filed under Philippine law in UK courts, could potentially lower procedural barriers that have historically prevented overseas communities from pursuing claims against British-based multinationals for damages suffered abroad.

Legal observers will closely watch whether English courts accept the scientific link between corporate emissions and specific climate disasters, potentially opening new avenues for climate litigation globally.