Chubb faces lawsuit over excluded climate proposal
Shareholder advocacy group As You Sow has filed a lawsuit against global insurance giant Chubb Limited after it excluded a climate-related proposal from its 2026 proxy materials
The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks a court order that would compel the insurer to include the proposal on its 2026 proxy ballot.
As You Sow had submitted a proposal asking shareholders to vote on whether Chubb should commission a report examining the potential for subrogation claims related to climate-driven losses. Such claims could see the insurer pursue third parties alleged to be responsible for pollution, including major oil and gas companies, in an effort to recover damages linked to extreme weather events. As You Sow argues that this approach could reduce losses, benefit shareholders and help preserve affordable homeowners’ insurance.
As a major provider of homeowners’ insurance in the US, Chubb is directly affected by the financial impact of extreme weather. For example, the 2025 California wildfires were a significant contributor to pre-tax catastrophe losses last year, wiping out nearly $1bn in operating income.
“Homeowners are not responsible for the climate crisis, yet they are the ones bearing the cost,” said Danielle Fugere, president and chief counsel of As You Sow. “Insurance companies are raising rates and dropping coverage because of climate-related disasters, but the parties most responsible—the major fossil fuel producers—are not being held accountable. Our proposal simply asks Chubb to evaluate whether recovering costs from responsible parties could help keep insurance affordable for the families and communities that depend on it.”
NZI Transition Equities Summit
15 April 2026 | London | Register here
However, Chubb informed As You Sow in January that it would not include the proposal in its proxy materials for its upcoming annual general meeting, which is typically held in May.
The legal challenge comes as the US Securities and Exchange Commission announced it would no longer act as an arbiter on so-called “no-action requests”. In the past, companies seeking to exclude shareholder proposals were required to obtain the regulator’s approval.
With the SEC now declining to intervene in such disputes, investors’ primary avenue for challenging the exclusion of proposals is through the courts.
“This case also implicates the right of a company’s shareholders to have their voices heard on matters of great significance to long-term corporate strategy,” said Nicolas Sansone, attorney with Public Citizen Litigation Group and the lead lawyer on the case. “SEC rules forbid a company from excluding shareholder proposals, like As You Sow’s, that go beyond day-to-day business operations and require the evaluation of matters related to important public policy issues.”
The SEC's shift has prompted a growing number of shareholder lawsuits. The Nathan Cummings Foundation recently filed suit against Axon Enterprise to prevent the company from excluding a proposal on political spending transparency.
Some challenges have already resulted in settlements. AT&T reached an agreement in February with four New York City pension funds to include a previously excluded proposal on its proxy ballot, while PepsiCo similarly agreed to include a proposal following a dispute with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Institutional Investment Conferences & Summits from Longview Networks
