ADVERTISEMENT

Vedanta Can Be Sued In England By Zambian Citizens, Says U.K. Supreme Court

Over 1,800 Zambian citizens had filed a suit against Vedanta Ltd. and its subsidiary in England over alleged pollution in Zambia.

A pedestrian passes the Supreme Court in London, U.K. (Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg)
A pedestrian passes the Supreme Court in London, U.K. (Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg)

More than 1,800 Zambian citizens can sue Vedanta Ltd. and its subsidiary in England over alleged pollution in Zambia, the U.K. Supreme Court ruled today.

The citizens of Chingola district in Zambia initiated a suit against Vedanta and Konkola Copper Mines in a U.K. court in 2005, alleging that their health and agriculture was damaged due to the discharge of toxic matter from the company’s mine into their waterways.

Vedanta and Konkola Mines challenged the jurisdiction of U.K. courts to hear the case, which was dismissed by the high court and court of appeals in 2017. The company then appealed these ruling before the nation’s highest court.

The court relied on the Recast Brussels Regulation, which confers a right on any claimant—regardless of their domicile—to sue an English-domiciled defendant in England irrespective of connecting factors to other jurisdictions.

In this case, even though Konkola Mines is based in Zambia, the court said that the English Courts are required to apply the “proper place” test under domestic law. This test requires English courts to examine connecting factors to one or more potential jurisdiction, but the aim is to search for a single jurisdiction in which the claims against all defendants may most suitably be tried. And though the risk of irreconcilable judgments—if the Zambian court also decides to hear the matter—is a relevant factor, it’s not a trump card to disallow the case to proceed in the U.K., the court held.

The Supreme Court also pointed out that this factor, the risk of irreconcilable judgments, would have prevailed if substantial justice was available to the parties in Zambia. But the court said there are two ‘access to justice’ issues in Zambia:

  • The citizens are extremely poor and don’t have the legal aid to pursue the case
  • There’s a lack of sufficiently substantial and suitably experienced legal teams in Zambia to enable effective litigation of this size and complexity, against a well-resourced opponent like Konkola Mines.