Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group: Implications of the UK High Court’s Decision

Francesca Farrington

doi:10.1017/bhj.2021.10

Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group: Implications of the UK High Court’s Decision

Francesca Farrington^* (Corresponding Author)

^*Corresponding author for this work

Law

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The High Court of England and Wales in its November 2020 judgment in Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group1 (BHP) declined jurisdiction to hear the case initiated by victims of the Fundão Dam collapse in Brazil on the grounds of abuse of process. The decision raises serious questions about the Court’s willingness to vindicate the fair trial rights of victims of human rights abuses linked to multinational enterprises (MNEs). In this judgment, Turner J also made obiter comments on the possibility of staying the case on application of Article 34 of the Recast Brussels Regulation (Recast Regulation),2 the doctrine of forum non conveniens (FNC), and/or the Court’s case management discretion.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	392-398
Number of pages	7
Journal	Business and Human Rights Journal
Volume	6
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2021.10
Publication status	Published - 8 Jun 2021

Bibliographical note

The title of the case has been corrected throughout since original publication. A corrigendum notice detailing this change has also been published (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2021.31)

Keywords

access to justice
Brexit
duty of care
forum non conveniens

Access to Document

10.1017/bhj.2021.10Licence: CC BY

Farrington_BHRJ_municipio_de_mariana_VOR
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Final published version, 109 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{4f3776b5a00246b8a68eaba9f7089043,

title = "Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group: Implications of the UK High Court{\textquoteright}s Decision",

abstract = "The High Court of England and Wales in its November 2020 judgment in Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group1 (BHP) declined jurisdiction to hear the case initiated by victims of the Fund{\~a}o Dam collapse in Brazil on the grounds of abuse of process. The decision raises serious questions about the Court{\textquoteright}s willingness to vindicate the fair trial rights of victims of human rights abuses linked to multinational enterprises (MNEs). In this judgment, Turner J also made obiter comments on the possibility of staying the case on application of Article 34 of the Recast Brussels Regulation (Recast Regulation),2 the doctrine of forum non conveniens (FNC), and/or the Court{\textquoteright}s case management discretion.",

keywords = "access to justice, Brexit, duty of care, forum non conveniens",

author = "Francesca Farrington",

note = "The title of the case has been corrected throughout since original publication. A corrigendum notice detailing this change has also been published (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2021.31)",

year = "2021",

month = jun,

day = "8",

doi = "10.1017/bhj.2021.10",

language = "English",

volume = "6",

pages = "392--398",

journal = "Business and Human Rights Journal",

issn = "2057-0198",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group

T2 - Implications of the UK High Court’s Decision

AU - Farrington, Francesca

N1 - The title of the case has been corrected throughout since original publication. A corrigendum notice detailing this change has also been published (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2021.31)

PY - 2021/6/8

Y1 - 2021/6/8

N2 - The High Court of England and Wales in its November 2020 judgment in Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group1 (BHP) declined jurisdiction to hear the case initiated by victims of the Fundão Dam collapse in Brazil on the grounds of abuse of process. The decision raises serious questions about the Court’s willingness to vindicate the fair trial rights of victims of human rights abuses linked to multinational enterprises (MNEs). In this judgment, Turner J also made obiter comments on the possibility of staying the case on application of Article 34 of the Recast Brussels Regulation (Recast Regulation),2 the doctrine of forum non conveniens (FNC), and/or the Court’s case management discretion.

AB - The High Court of England and Wales in its November 2020 judgment in Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group1 (BHP) declined jurisdiction to hear the case initiated by victims of the Fundão Dam collapse in Brazil on the grounds of abuse of process. The decision raises serious questions about the Court’s willingness to vindicate the fair trial rights of victims of human rights abuses linked to multinational enterprises (MNEs). In this judgment, Turner J also made obiter comments on the possibility of staying the case on application of Article 34 of the Recast Brussels Regulation (Recast Regulation),2 the doctrine of forum non conveniens (FNC), and/or the Court’s case management discretion.

KW - access to justice

KW - Brexit

KW - duty of care

KW - forum non conveniens

U2 - 10.1017/bhj.2021.10

DO - 10.1017/bhj.2021.10

M3 - Article

SN - 2057-0198

VL - 6

SP - 392

EP - 398

JO - Business and Human Rights Journal

JF - Business and Human Rights Journal

IS - 2

ER -

Municipio de Mariana v BHP Group: Implications of the UK High Court’s Decision

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this