Municipio de Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2026] EWCA Civ 502 (06 May 2026)

Municipio de Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2026] EWCA Civ 502 (06 May 2026)

Permission to appeal is refused. The trial judge's findings on strict liability and fault-based liability under Brazilian law were supported by ample evidence and not irrational. No procedural irregularity or failure to engage with BHP's case was established. The multifactorial approach was correctly applied. The high threshold for appellate intervention on fact and expert evidence is not met.

Citation
[2026] EWCA Civ 502
Parties
Respondents/claimants: Município de Mariana and the Claimants identified in the Schedules to the Claim Forms; Applicants/defendants: BHP Group (UK) Ltd (formerly BHP Billiton PLC and thereafter BHP Group PLC); Applicants/defendants: BHP Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (technology and Construction Court) / Application for Permission to Appeal and Expedition
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused; application for expedition refused.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability, Fault Based Liability, Procedural Irregularity, Jurisdiction, Limitation, Expert Evidence, Corporate Responsibility
Environmental Law Civil Procedure Foreign Law Strict Liability Fault Based Liability Procedural Irregularity Jurisdiction Limitation +2 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

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

Respondents/claimants

BHP Group (UK) Ltd (formerly BHP Billiton PLC and thereafter BHP Group PLC)

Applicants/defendants

BHP Group Limited

Applicants/defendants

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (technology and Construction Court) / Application for Permission to Appeal and Expedition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether BHP is strictly liable as 'polluter' under Brazilian Environmental Law
  2. 2 Whether BHP is liable under Article 186 of the Brazilian Civil Code (fault-based liability)
  3. 3 Whether procedural irregularity or lack of judicial engagement occurred

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is refused. The trial judge's findings on strict liability and fault-based liability under Brazilian law were supported by ample evidence and not irrational. No procedural irregularity or failure to engage with BHP's case was established. The multifactorial approach was correctly applied. The high threshold for appellate intervention on fact and expert evidence is not met.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused; application for expedition refused.

Orders

  • No permission to appeal granted on liability grounds.
  • No expedition ordered.