Jalla & Ors v Shell International Trading And Shipping Company & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 63 (27 January 2021)

Jalla & Ors v Shell International Trading And Shipping Company & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 63 (27 January 2021)

The oil spill was a single, one-off event that gave rise to a single cause of action in nuisance, which accrued when the oil first reached the appellants' land. There was no continuing nuisance for limitation purposes, and the limitation period was not extended by the ongoing presence of oil. Claims not brought within the limitation period are statute-barred.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Civ 63
Parties
Appellants/claimants: Harrison Jalla and Others; Respondent/defendant: Shell International Trading and Shipping Company; Respondent/defendant: Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (tcc)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Nuisance, Limitation of Actions, Continuing Nuisance, Jurisdiction, Oil Pollution, Representative Actions
Tort Law Environmental Law Civil Procedure Nuisance Limitation of Actions Continuing Nuisance Jurisdiction Oil Pollution +1 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harrison Jalla and Others

Appellants/claimants

Shell International Trading and Shipping Company

Respondent/defendant

Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (tcc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the oil spill gave rise to a continuing nuisance or a one-off nuisance for limitation purposes
  2. 2 Whether claims in nuisance are statute-barred if not commenced within the limitation period
  3. 3 Whether the facts support a fresh cause of action in nuisance each day the oil remained on land

Ratio Decidendi

The oil spill was a single, one-off event that gave rise to a single cause of action in nuisance, which accrued when the oil first reached the appellants' land. There was no continuing nuisance for limitation purposes, and the limitation period was not extended by the ongoing presence of oil. Claims not brought within the limitation period are statute-barred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration that the nuisance alleged could not be a continuing nuisance for limitation purposes
  • Claims against STASCO and SNEPCO are statute-barred for claimants whose limitation period expired before the relevant dates