Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 951 (08 July 2022)

Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 951 (08 July 2022)

The Court of Appeal held that the claims should not be struck out or stayed as an abuse of process, nor stayed under Article 34 Brussels Recast, nor stayed against BHP Australia on forum non conveniens grounds. The claimants demonstrated that Brazilian redress mechanisms were not adequate or sufficiently accessible for all claimants and heads of loss, and that the English proceedings were not unmanageable or pointless. The risk of irreconcilable judgments was not sufficient to justify a stay, and substantial justice could not be guaranteed in Brazil for all claimants. The appeal was allowed and the claims permitted to proceed in England.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 951
Parties
Claimants/appellants: Município de Mariana and the Claimants identified in the Schedules to the Claim Forms; Defendant/respondent: BHP Group (UK) Ltd (formerly BHP Group PLC); Defendant/respondent: BHP Group Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil Division) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court (tcc)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claims permitted to proceed in England
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Forum Non Conveniens, Article 34 Brussels Recast, Group Litigation, Class Actions, Jurisdiction, Compensation for Environmental Damage
Tort Environmental Law Civil Procedure Private International Law Abuse of Process Forum Non Conveniens Article 34 Brussels Recast Group Litigation +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Município de Mariana and the Claimants identified in the Schedules to the Claim Forms

Claimants/appellants

BHP Group (UK) Ltd (formerly BHP Group PLC)

Defendant/respondent

BHP Group Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil Division) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court (tcc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claims should be struck out or stayed as abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether claims should be stayed under Article 34 Brussels Recast
  3. 3 Whether claims against BHP Australia should be stayed on forum non conveniens grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the claims should not be struck out or stayed as an abuse of process, nor stayed under Article 34 Brussels Recast, nor stayed against BHP Australia on forum non conveniens grounds. The claimants demonstrated that Brazilian redress mechanisms were not adequate or sufficiently accessible for all claimants and heads of loss, and that the English proceedings were not unmanageable or pointless. The risk of irreconcilable judgments was not sufficient to justify a stay, and substantial justice could not be guaranteed in Brazil for all claimants. The appeal was allowed and the claims permitted to proceed in England.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claims permitted to proceed in England

Orders

  • Strike out and stay orders set aside
  • Claims reinstated for trial in England