An environment campaign organisation is staging the latest round of a fight with directors of oil giant Shell.

ClientEarth, which is a shareholder in Shell, is unhappy about the company’s “climate change strategy” and wants to make a “breach” of duties claim against directors.

A High Court judge in May refused to give ClientEarth permission to continue its claim after considering written arguments.

ClientEarth then asked to be allowed to make oral arguments.

Lawyers representing the charity on Wednesday asked Mr Justice Trower to reconsider his decision, at a High Court hearing, in the Rolls Building in central London.

Shell says the judge should dismiss ClientEarth’s reconsideration application.

Mr Justice Trower had said, in a ruling published on May 12, that in order to pursue its claim, ClientEarth had to show there had been “an actual or proposed act or omission involving negligence, default, breach of duty or breach of trust” by a director or directors.

He dismissed the charity’s application after concluding that it had not produced sufficient evidence to support its claim.

Barristers representing ClientEarth on Wednesday asked the judge to reconsider and outlined the “premise” of the charity’s case.

Shell directors had “already identified” climate change risk as a “material factor” that “impacts on their duties” to promote the company’s long-term commercial success, they said, in a written case outline.

ClientEarth argued that strategies adopted by the directors constituted a “breach of their duties”.

Plans adopted by Shell were “irrational”, barristers added.

They said ClientEarth’s claim should be allowed to proceed.

Lawyers representing Shell argued that Mr Justice Trower’s May ruling was “unimpeachable”.

They said ClientEarth had received “minimal support” from shareholders and argued that the judge should “stand by” his decision.