Vale SA v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor
[2023] EWCA Civ 1388
Município De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Limited (formerly BHP Group PLC) & Anor
11 January 2024
[2024] EWHC 23 (TCC)
High Court
A huge lawsuit over a dam collapse in Brazil had an application to add more claims. The judge allowed some changes to the claims but rejected others because they were too late and too vague. The trial will go ahead, but with some adjustments to the schedule.
Key Facts
- •Claimants (Brazilian individuals, businesses, etc.) seek £36 billion in damages from BHP and Vale for the 2015 Fundão Dam collapse.
- •Claims are based on Brazilian law, alleging strict and fault-based liability.
- •BHP filed Part 20 claims against Vale for contribution.
- •A trial on threshold liability issues is scheduled for October 2024.
- •Claimants applied to amend their Re-Amended Master Particulars of Claim (RAMPOC) and Amended Reply.
Legal Principles
Amendment of a statement of case requires consent or court permission (CPR 17.1).
CPR 17.1
Court has discretion to allow amendments, balancing injustice to applicant vs. opposing party (CPR 17.3, CIP Properties v Galliford Try, Quah Su-Ling v Goldman Sachs).
CPR 17.3, CIP Properties (AIPT) Ltd v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd [2015] EWHC 1345 (TCC), Quah Su-Ling v Goldman Sachs International [2015] EWHC 759
Outcomes
Permission granted for amendments concerning Brazilian law.
Amendments are arguable, cogent, and don't unduly prejudice BHP; expert discussions are ongoing.
Permission refused for amendments introducing extensive new factual allegations (paragraph 196A).
Amendments are inadequately particularized and extremely late; BHP would face an unreasonable burden.
Permission granted for amendments in paragraph 205A (specific knowledge of dam defects).
Amendments are arguable, cogent, and though requiring additional investigation, don't cause unfair prejudice to BHP.
Amendments to heads of loss deferred until after the first stage trial.
Sensible approach given the timing and focus of the first stage trial.
Permission granted for amendments to the Reply (limitation, settlement agreements, geotechnical reports).
Amendments raise discrete points of law or fact that can be addressed within the existing timetable.
Claimants to bear costs of amendments.
Usual rule for amendment applications, with partial success and failure.
Similar Cases
Qatar Investment and Project Development Holding Co & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art S.A. & Ors
[2023] EWHC 1916 (KB)
Paribas Trust Corporation UK Limited v Uro Property Holdings S.A
[2024] EWHC 2542 (Comm)
Munícipio de Mariana v BHP Group (UK) Limited & Anor
[2023] EWHC 2607 (TCC)
Steenbok Newco 10 Sarl & Anor v Formal Holdings Limited & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1160 (Comm)