Report says climate-related lawsuits involving data centres have risen worldwide since 2015

Datacentres and the fast expansion of artificial intelligence are increasingly drawing climate-related lawsuits across multiple countries, according to an analysis published this week by the London School of Economics. The report, highlighted by The Guardian on June 25, reviewed roughly 3,600 climate-related legal claims filed since 2015 and found that data centres are a growing focus of environmental litigation.

The LSE analysis ties the rise in cases to how data-centre operations depend on electricity generation, water use, and emissions. The Guardian report says disputes have pointed to concerns over the fuel sources used to power facilities, the water consumed by cooling systems, and air pollution connected to electricity and cooling-related processes.

The legal challenge is described as widening beyond a single jurisdiction, with cases referenced “from Chile to Ireland.” In those disputes, plaintiffs have sought to push developers and public authorities to account for climate impacts, including through permitting and disclosure processes, according to the Guardian summary of the report’s findings.

The Guardian report frames the data-centre litigation trend as part of a broader pattern in climate litigation, where courts and regulators face increasing claims that government decisions and private infrastructure planning do not adequately address greenhouse gas effects. It also links the timing of the surge in filings, starting from 2015, to accelerating demand for data storage and compute capacity.

While the Guardian article characterizes datacentre-related disputes as increasing, it does not identify specific rulings, damages, or settlement terms for individual cases in its description. As a result, the practical impact on specific facilities, projects, or timelines depends on the status and jurisdiction of each lawsuit rather than on a single outcome.

The report’s publication comes as data-centre development continues in many regions, raising new questions for planning authorities about how to evaluate climate, water, and air-quality impacts. The litigation trend also adds pressure for clearer guidance on how emissions accounting and environmental risk assessments are handled during approvals and ongoing compliance.

Next steps depend on the court schedules and procedural posture of the cases highlighted in the report, including whether claims move past early motions and whether judges order changes to permits or require additional environmental reviews. In parallel, regulators may face increased expectations to tighten documentation around energy sourcing, cooling water demands, and pollution controls for large-scale digital infrastructure.