Background and Context

On 21 May 2025, the EFTA Court delivered its Advisory Opinion on The Norwegian State v Greenpeace Nordic, Nature and Youth Norway (Norway v Greenpeace).  This case deals with a request for clarification regarding the interpretation of the scope of Article 3(1) of the Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (the EIA Directive). In particular, the case dealt with whether this provision imposes an obligation to assess the impact on climate from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions arising from not only the project itself (in this case, the extraction of petroleum and natural gas), but also from the utilisation (combustion) of the natural resources extracted.

The three questions on how the Directive is to be interpreted were referred to the EFTA Court by the Oslo Court of Appeals. The case concerns three different oil and gas fields that received exploitation licenses and were subsequently subject (or not) to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) as part of the process for issuing a Program for Development and Operation (PDO),  which is the final authorization granted by the Norwegian Ministry of Energy for an oil and gas project to commence.

In this note, we discuss in detail the Advisory Opinion and its implications. This case lies at the interface between climate, environmental protection and energy law, and it has pivotal importance for the oil and gas sector and beyond, with potentially far-reaching consequences. The Advisory Opinion highlights how and to what extent climate and environmental state obligations and pledges are being incorporated into decision-making processes for the licensing of oil and gas activities, and more broadly, for large infrastructure projects both within and beyond the energy sector.