Note that if you purchase something via one of our links, including Amazon, we may earn a small commission.
Four Canadian youth are suing CPP for failing to account for climate risk.
When Dr. Seuss famously wrote in The Lorax, “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better,” he could’ve been talking about Travis Olson.
The 22-year-old grocery store clerk from Camrose, Alberta, isn’t sitting on his hands about the change he would like to see in the world. Along with three other young applicants, he is suing the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), the country’s largest investment manager, for claiming it breached its duty to invest in their best interests by failing to protect their pensions from climate risk. They are partnering with the lawyers from Goldblatt Partners LLP and Vancouver-based Ecojustice, Canada’s largest environmental law charity.
Olson says he is frustrated that CPP wasn’t fulfilling their responsibility with pension contributions that invested in companies whose values didn’t align with his own, and “I felt like it was important to push them in the right direction.”
The direction CPP is currently heading towards is one that includes oil and gas companies. Their investments, sustained by mandatory contributions from more than 15 million workers and their employers, as well as the investment returns generated for over 22 million total participants, have been poured into dozens of fossil fuel companies such as Alphagen, Nephin Energy, and Wolf Midstream, according to a report compiled by non-profit organization Shift: Action for Pension Wealth & Planet Health.
In 2022, CPPIB committed to achieve net-zero emissions in its investments by 2050 but since then, have backed out of that commitment and continued to dedicate billions of Canadians’ retirement dollars into fossil fuel infrastructure and the companies fueling the climate crisis, says Shift’s executive director Adam Scott.
“These investments lock us into a dangerous future,” Scott adds, “and I think it is just the early days of young people using the law to try to address a problem that has gone unaddressed for a long time.”
Scott makes a vital point: Youth-driven lawsuits to combat the effects of climate change have been ramping up across Canada and around the world, as more young people recognize how government policy and investments in fossil fuel technology could lead to increased degradation of the environment and increased warming.
Defending the Climate and Holding Governments Accountable
Hirji et al. v. Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, which has yet to receive a response from the investment managers, isn’t looking for any monetary damages but a change in governance, explains Ecojustice lawyer Karine Peloffy.
“Our notice of application alleges that young contributors, like our applicants, who will all retire after 2050, will retire into a world where climate impacts will have affected the global economy in a very negative way, and we are alleging that that puts into jeopardy their benefits, or could lead to higher contribution rates,” she says.
“We would expect that climate risk would be better managed, and that we would have greater assurances that the funds will be there for younger Canadians and future generations of Canadians as well, who are all very worried about what’s happening with their investments,” Peloffy says.
Litigation can be time-consuming and expensive, but it is often the only way to ensure governments, financial institutions, and polluters are held accountable when they break the laws that defend our climate and communities.
– Ecojustice lawyer Karine Peloffy.
The four young applicants, ranging in age from 20 to 33, are not alone in using the legal route to reverse environmentally harmful policies. In Mathur v. Ontario, seven young plaintiffs along with Ecojustice sought to hold Premier Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative government accountable for its lack of climate regulation. The suit, which began six years ago, argues that the province’s defanging of emission-reduction targets in 2018 constituted a breach of their Charter rights because it was inconsistent with action scientists say is necessary to maintain a livable planet.
But in December, the Ontario government stepped away from the legal quagmire. Days before the applicants were set to appear at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice for their long-awaited hearing, the Ontario government quietly repealed the very climate law that had been a focus of the case, eliminating its statutory requirements to set greenhouse-gas reduction targets, develop a climate plan, and publicly report on progress.
The December hearing was postponed while Ecojustice, together with their clients, determine the best path forward.
But there is a case going to the courts. Another youth-driven suit, LaRose v. His Majesty The King, argues that the federal government’s climate targets and policies are insufficient and that they violate the youth’s Charter Section 7 rights by exposing them to dangerous climate-related harms. Fifteen applicants under 20 from across Canada are named in this suit.
After several amending pleadings and a decision by an appeal court, the Federal Court of Canada said the case will proceed to an eight-week trial beginning in October 2026 in Vancouver.
“Litigation can be time-consuming and expensive, but it is often the only way to ensure governments, financial institutions, and polluters are held accountable when they break the laws that defend our climate and communities,” notes Peloffy.
Ecojustice has been working with youth on these lawsuits because “we aim to ensure the laws meant to protect people and the planet are strong, enforced, and evolving to meet today’s environmental challenges,” Peloffy adds.
Peloffy and the Ecojustice legal team, who provide their services pro bono, find this work especially satisfying and engaging. “Using one’s legal skills and expertise in the service of young heroes who not only face a future threatened by climate change but also find the courage to hold one of Canada’s largest financial institutions to account has to be one of the most fulfilling professional experiences for a lawyer,” she adds.
These [fossil fuel] investments lock us into a dangerous future, and I think it is just the early days of young people using the law to try to address a problem that has gone unaddressed for a long time.
– Adam Scott, executive director for Shift: Action for Pension Wealth & Planet Health
Even if they lose this specific suit, Peloffy says, “if the court says CPPIB has no obligation, I think it will signal that we clearly need to change the laws.”
She also says they would consider an appeal if the suit doesn’t go their way.
Hassan Ahmad, an assistant law professor at York University’s Osgoode Hall, has noticed an aligning trend with the surge of cases such as Mathur, LaRose and the suit against CPPIB. “I’ve seen how there are younger and more intrepid lawyers working to protect the future for generations to come,” he says, “and helping youth who may not have the economic means to hold the government’s feet to the fire.”
Olson says this surge of youth-driven lawsuits is just the beginning. “We're tired of this status quo and we want a better future so we’re taking this into our own hands with legal action.”
Read a story by a pair of student writers who are working to help high schools all over the world divest from the fossil fuel economy. It is published by the Bluedot Institute, our sister organization. The Institute’s mission is to inspire and empower young people to innovate solutions to climate challenges and lead the next generation of initiatives that promote a healthy, resilient, and biodiverse environment.
