Low-carbon transitions are essential but contested, particularly regarding what constitutes a ‘just transition’. To grasp their political nature, adopting a spatial perspective becomes indispensable, as different actors hold different views on how to allocate burdens and benefits across scales. In this study, we examine how notions of ‘justice’ are expressed and manifested spatially, negotiated between conflicting parties, and undergo changes, delving into the conflict surrounding an electric vehicle (EV) factory near Berlin, Germany. To do so, we leverage the theoretical lens of ‘hydrosocial territories’. This framework helps to understand how beliefs about desirable societal development (‘imaginaries’) interlink with actors’ perceptions of just distribution of water-related benefits and burdens, as well as decision-making power across spatial scales. We identify one territory supporting the factory and two counter-territories challenging its legitimacy. Actors of one counter-territory question the net benefit for in situ communities due to water challenges, while the other casts doubt on the legitimacy of the capitalist systems as such and considers the EV technology and its supply chains exemplary of exploitative relations in the water sector. We derive three key insights for the conceptualisation of ‘justice’: Firstly, divergence in the underlying values of desired societal development and the spatial scales at which transitions are conceptualised can affect the possibilities for compromise. Secondly, justice, as viewed by actors negotiating transitions, requires continuous reassessment due to its fluid nature. Thirdly, localities where low-carbon transitions occur are perceived at multiple spatial scales simultaneously, adding complexity to how actors understand justice. Our research holds value for the study of low-carbon transitions, illuminating the complexity, spatiality, and fluidity of justice and offering a heuristic device to capture it.