On October 27, 2025, a legal battle with potentially far-reaching implications for Canada’s financial and environmental future erupted in Toronto. Four young Canadians—Aliya Hirji, Travis Olson, Ravneet Singh, and Chloe Tse—filed a lawsuit in Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice against the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPP Investments), the sixth-largest pension fund manager in the world. Their claim: CPP Investments is failing to protect their pensions—and those of millions of Canadians—from the mounting risks posed by climate change.
The lawsuit, supported by Ecojustice and Goldblatt Partners LLP, argues that CPP Investments has breached its legal duties by subjecting contributors’ retirement savings to “undue risk of loss” through a lackluster approach to climate-related financial risk. The plaintiffs, all under the age of 33 and not planning to retire until after 2050, allege that the fund’s continued investment in fossil fuels and its recent retreat from a net-zero emissions commitment amount to a reckless gamble with their futures.
“I do not want to be suing my pension manager, but I want to retire on a stable pension into a livable future,” 20-year-old Aliya Hirji told reporters in Toronto, according to The Canadian Press. Her sentiment was echoed by co-plaintiff Travis Olson, 22, who stated, “My pension manager’s practices are incompatible with an economically stable, climate-safe future that my generation is relying on. I’m looking forward to the day our pension manager stops betting against the world my generation will inherit, and until they do so voluntarily, we’re asking the courts to step in and protect our contributions.”
At the heart of the case is a claim that CPP Investments is drastically underestimating the financial risks that climate change poses to the Canada Pension Plan. The plaintiffs argue that the pension fund’s climate models—described as “black box” by their legal team—downplay the potential for catastrophic losses and provide a dangerous sense of security. According to Karine Peloffy, lawyer and Sustainable Finance Lead at Ecojustice, “Without action to curb fossil fuels, we are on track for a 3°C warming by the end of this century. Economists warn that it would be like experiencing the Great Depression forever, yet CPP Investments reports only a 4% net present value loss in a ‘hot house world’. The case alleges that by recklessly downplaying one of the greatest threats to the pensions’ long-term value, CPP Investments is effectively flying blind to the real risks of climate change and failing to protect the pensions of young Canadians who will retire after 2050.”
The lawsuit seeks a range of declarations, including an order that CPP Investments act “in the best interests of all contributors and beneficiaries” and disclose more information about climate-related risks in its investment portfolio. The plaintiffs and their legal team stress that this is not just about their own financial futures, but about the retirement security of more than 22 million Canadians whose funds—nearly $732 billion in assets—are managed by CPP Investments. As Simon Archer, partner at Goldblatt Partners LLP, put it, “The Canada Pension Plan is the cornerstone of Canada’s social safety net, meant to ensure the retirement security of current and future generations of Canadians. Our clients are concerned and allege that CPP Investments is undermining the very retirement security of the young Canadians it is mandated to protect due to its poor management of climate risks.”
This case is groundbreaking in more ways than one. It marks the first time a Canadian investor has been sued for mismanaging climate risks, and it is believed to be the first climate lawsuit globally against a pension fund investment manager anchored in the duty of impartiality and even-handedness toward young contributors—those who will retire after 2050, when climate-related financial risks are expected to be even greater. According to Financial Post, similar lawsuits have been filed by young people in other countries, such as the United States, where a high-profile case against the federal government was dismissed by a federal appeals court and ultimately declined by the Supreme Court.
CPP Investments, for its part, insists it is acting in the best interests of all contributors. In a statement, the fund said, “Climate change is one of many material factors we consider in managing risk and pursuing opportunities across the whole economy over the long term.” Spokesman Michel Leduc told The Canadian Press that the fund’s “focus remains steadfast on integrating climate-related considerations into our investment activity.” He also emphasized that CPP Investments would defend its approach through the courts if necessary, arguing, “An action against CPP Investments, and our efforts to maintain the sustainability of the Canada Pension Plan, is an action against the retirement security of 22 million Canadians.”
However, critics remain unconvinced. The plaintiffs point to CPP Investments’ decision in May 2025 to quietly drop its commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050—a pledge it had made only three years earlier. While the fund reports a 41 percent decline in its portfolio’s carbon footprint since fiscal 2020 and claims to remain committed to sustainability, it has also stated it does not intend to sell fossil fuel assets, but rather invest in the “energy transition.” This approach, say the plaintiffs and their supporters, is insufficient in the face of a climate crisis that is already impacting Canadians from coast to coast.
“Canadians from coast to coast are dying in fossil-fueled heatwaves and wildfires. Thousands of people are fleeing their homes and losing their livelihoods. Entire towns are burning to the ground. Still, CPP Investments is investing billions of dollars in fossil fuel expansion,” said Aliya Hirji, highlighting the urgency of the issue. Adam Scott, Executive Director at Shift: Action for Pension Wealth & Planet Health, added, “The science is crystal clear that fossil fuels cannot expand and must be phased out to avoid catastrophic climate change, but CPP investments managers continue to put their heads in the sand. CPP Investments most basic duty to invest in our best interest requires them to invest in a stable climate.”
The case also underscores a broader debate about the responsibilities of major institutional investors in the era of climate change. Pension funds like CPP Investments are under increasing scrutiny to align their portfolios with the realities of a warming world—not just for environmental reasons, but to safeguard the long-term financial well-being of their beneficiaries. The plaintiffs’ legal team contends that by failing to adequately consider the systemic risks posed by continued fossil fuel investments, CPP Investments is exposing future retirees to the risk of dramatically reduced benefits or the need for higher contribution rates.
For now, the outcome of the lawsuit remains uncertain, but its impact is already being felt. As Rav Singh, one of the plaintiffs, put it, “Our case is alleging that CPP Investments is mismanaging our pension fund by failing to adequately respond to climate change. CPP is supposed to be one of our most reliable sources of retirement income. We should all be concerned that our CPP benefits may not be as dependable as we’d like to think.”
As the case proceeds, the eyes of Canada—and indeed, the world—will be watching. The court’s eventual decision could set a precedent not only for how pension funds manage climate risk, but for the broader question of how financial institutions balance the competing demands of present needs and future security in an era of accelerating environmental change.
