These sort of cases, involving class action and cross-border jurisdiction, are nothing new to RB, who has extensive experience in civil litigation within these realms. The Brazil dam collapse case holds particular relevance and interest for RB, given his background in handling complex international legal disputes that demand intricate legal gymnastics. As an internationalist, global traveller, and human rights lawyer, RB’s engagement with similar issues, such as the high-profile cross-border kidnapping case involving John Buckley and Ecuador, highlights his deep understanding of the challenges posed by international jurisdictional boundaries.
This Brazil case floats naturally within RB’s expertise, aligning with his commitment to pursuing justice across borders. RB’s involvement in such matters reflects his holistic approach to international law, where human rights, corporate accountability, and the complexities of global governance intersect. His vast legal experience makes him adept at navigating the multifaceted legal frameworks often required in class actions with cross-border implications.
Brazil Dam collapse liability trial opens in London’s High Court
Background of the case
The case of the Fundão Dam collapse is a high-profile environmental litigation currently being heard at the Rolls Building in London. It concerns the catastrophic failure of a tailings dam in Minas Gerais, Brazil, in November 2015. The collapse is regarded as one of Brazil’s worst environmental disasters, killing 19 people, destroying entire villages, and contaminating the River Doce, a crucial water source for local communities. The Fundão Dam was jointly owned and operated by Samarco, a subsidiary co-owned by two mining giants, Vale and BHP. The disaster has led to extensive legal battles both in Brazil and the UK, as affected communities and environmental groups seek compensation for the devastation caused by the dam’s collapse.
The legal battle
The current litigation is brought against BHP by a group of over 6,20,000 Brazilian claimants, represented by London claimant firm Pogust Goodhead. The claim seeks up to £36 billion in damages, marking it as one of the largest environmental claims ever pursued in English courts. BHP, once listed on the London Stock Exchange, denies liability and maintains that the UK case is unnecessary, duplicating legal proceedings already underway in Brazil. The company also points to the ongoing work of the Renova Foundation, a non-profit established to manage reparations and environmental recovery efforts following the disaster.
The trial, expected to last 12 weeks, is being heard by Mrs. Justice O’Farrell. The initial stage of the proceedings will focus on opening submissions, where both parties will lay out their arguments. The claimants’ legal team, led by Alain Choo Choy KC, has produced a 299-page skeleton argument detailing the corporate structure and liabilities of BHP Group. On the other side, BHP’s skeleton runs to 308 pages, with opening submissions anticipated to continue through Thursday.
Key legal issues
The case raises critical questions about corporate responsibility and cross-border jurisdiction. The collapse occurred in Brazil, but the litigation is being pursued in English courts because of BHP’s previous listing on the London Stock Exchange and its operations in multiple jurisdictions. BHP has argued that the claims should be dealt with in Brazil, where legal proceedings are already ongoing, and that the UK action represents a duplication of these efforts.
At the core of the trial is the question of whether BHP, as a co-owner of Samarco, bears responsibility for the dam’s collapse and its environmental and human toll. The claimants argue that BHP, as an international mining giant, should be held accountable for its role in the disaster and that the existing reparations process in Brazil has been insufficient. The application of Brazilian law by English judges is another key aspect of the trial, adding complexity to the proceedings given the differing legal frameworks and standards between the two countries.
Environmental and social impact
The Fundão Dam disaster had far-reaching consequences beyond the immediate loss of life and destruction of homes. The dam collapse released millions of cubic meters of toxic waste, severely affecting the River Doce and surrounding ecosystems. The floodwaters carried mud and debris over a vast area, displacing thousands of people, destroying local economies, and polluting water supplies. The environmental impact of the disaster has been described as a generational catastrophe, with the recovery of affected areas expected to take decades.
The Renova Foundation and Brazilian proceedings
BHP has pointed to the Renova Foundation as evidence of its commitment to remedying the damage caused by the disaster. The foundation, established in 2016 as part of an agreement between BHP, Vale, and Brazilian authorities, has been tasked with coordinating reparations and environmental restoration efforts. BHP argues that the work of Renova, alongside ongoing legal actions in Brazilian courts, makes the UK litigation unnecessary.
However, the claimants argue that the foundation’s efforts have been slow and insufficient, leaving many victims without adequate compensation. They contend that a UK ruling is needed to ensure that justice is served and that the full extent of the damage is acknowledged.
Broader implications
The trial has attracted significant international media attention, with the potential for far-reaching consequences for corporate accountability in environmental disasters. If the claimants are successful, it could set a precedent for holding multinational corporations accountable for their actions across borders, particularly in cases where local justice systems are perceived to be inadequate. The case also underscores the growing trend of environmental litigation being pursued in international courts, as affected communities seek justice beyond their home countries.
For BHP, a ruling against the company could have serious financial and reputational consequences, further highlighting the risks faced by large corporations operating in industries with significant environmental and social impacts.
Conclusion
The trial marks a critical moment in the ongoing efforts to hold BHP accountable for the Fundão Dam collapse. Over the next 12 weeks, the court will hear detailed arguments from both sides, with the outcome likely to have significant implications for corporate responsibility, environmental law, and cross-border jurisdiction. As the trial progresses, the focus will remain on whether BHP will be held liable for one of the worst environmental disasters in Brazil’s history and how English courts will navigate the complexities of applying Brazilian law in this landmark case.
