Vilca & Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 2757 (QB) (03 November 2016)

Vilca & Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 2757 (QB) (03 November 2016)

The application to rely on Mr Freeman as an expert witness is rejected because the Voluntary Principles do not constitute a sufficiently recognised or organised body of knowledge or expertise to admit expert evidence. The court can determine the issues by reference to the principles themselves without expert assistance. Permission to re-amend the Particulars of Claim is granted in accordance with the current draft, subject to further minor amendments and objections. The issue of reply witness statements is adjourned for consideration at a later stage.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2757 (QB)
Parties
Claimants: Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & 21 Others; Defendant: Xstrata Limited; Defendant: Compania Minera Antapaccay S. A. (formerly Xstrata Tintaya S. A.)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Case Management Conference; Interlocutory Applications
Outcome
Application to rely on Mr Freeman as expert witness refused; permission to re-amend Particulars of Claim granted subject to process; issue of reply witness statements adjourned.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Disclosure, Amendment of Pleadings, Trial Timetable, Corporate Responsibility, Security and Human Rights
Civil Procedure Tort Law Human Rights Expert Evidence Disclosure Amendment of Pleadings Trial Timetable Corporate Responsibility +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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & 21 Others

Claimants

Xstrata Limited

Defendant

Compania Minera Antapaccay S. A. (formerly Xstrata Tintaya S. A.)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Case Management Conference; Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants should have permission to rely on Mr Bennett Freeman as an expert witness regarding the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether permission should be granted to re-amend the Particulars of Claim
  3. 3 Whether to allow provision for reply witness statements in directions

Ratio Decidendi

The application to rely on Mr Freeman as an expert witness is rejected because the Voluntary Principles do not constitute a sufficiently recognised or organised body of knowledge or expertise to admit expert evidence. The court can determine the issues by reference to the principles themselves without expert assistance. Permission to re-amend the Particulars of Claim is granted in accordance with the current draft, subject to further minor amendments and objections. The issue of reply witness statements is adjourned for consideration at a later stage.

Court Disposition

Application to rely on Mr Freeman as expert witness refused; permission to re-amend Particulars of Claim granted subject to process; issue of reply witness statements adjourned.

Orders

  • Claimants refused permission to rely on Mr Freeman as expert witness.
  • Permission granted to re-amend Particulars of Claim in accordance with current draft, subject to process for further amendments and objections.