Lungowe & Ors v Vedanta Resources Plc & Anor [2016] EWHC 975 (TCC) (27 May 2016)

Lungowe & Ors v Vedanta Resources Plc & Anor [2016] EWHC 975 (TCC) (27 May 2016)

The English court cannot stay proceedings against Vedanta on forum non conveniens grounds due to the mandatory effect of Article 4 of the Recast Brussels Regulation as interpreted in Owusu v Jackson. The claim against Vedanta raises a real issue to be tried and is not an abuse of EU law. There is no basis for a stay on case management grounds. The applications by Vedanta and KCM to stay or set aside the proceedings are refused.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 975 (TCC)
Parties
Claimants: Dominic Liswaniso Lungowe & Others; First Defendant: Vedanta Resources Plc; Second Defendant: Konkola Copper Mines Plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Jurisdictional Challenge and Application for Stay of Proceedings / Interlocutory Applications—determination of Jurisdiction and Stay
Outcome
Applications by Vedanta and KCM for stay or to set aside proceedings refused. Proceedings to continue in England.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Forum Non Conveniens, Parent Company Liability, Group Litigation, Environmental Pollution, Abuse of EU Law, Case Management Stays
Private International Law Tort Law Environmental Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction Forum Non Conveniens Parent Company Liability 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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dominic Liswaniso Lungowe & Others

Claimants

Vedanta Resources Plc

First Defendant

Konkola Copper Mines Plc

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Jurisdictional Challenge and Application for Stay of Proceedings / Interlocutory Applications—determination of Jurisdiction and Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over claims against Vedanta and KCM
  2. 2 Whether proceedings against Vedanta can be stayed on forum non conveniens grounds
  3. 3 Whether the claim against Vedanta is an abuse of EU law

Ratio Decidendi

The English court cannot stay proceedings against Vedanta on forum non conveniens grounds due to the mandatory effect of Article 4 of the Recast Brussels Regulation as interpreted in Owusu v Jackson. The claim against Vedanta raises a real issue to be tried and is not an abuse of EU law. There is no basis for a stay on case management grounds. The applications by Vedanta and KCM to stay or set aside the proceedings are refused.

Court Disposition

Applications by Vedanta and KCM for stay or to set aside proceedings refused. Proceedings to continue in England.

Orders

  • Vedanta's application for a stay on forum non conveniens grounds is refused.
  • Vedanta's application for a stay on abuse of EU law grounds is refused.