In June, London’s High Court of Justice found that oil company Shell and its Nigerian subsidiary could be sued over oil pollution in Nigeria that has devastated local communities and the environment. A trial is set to take place at the High Court in 2027. 

‘This case reinforces the continuing responsibility of business enterprises for environmental damage, even for legacy or historic oil pollution that may have occurred many years back,’ says Damilola Olawuyi, Independent Expert for the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights.

In a statement to Global Insight, Shell said it welcomed the judgement. ‘For many years, the vast majority of spills in the Niger Delta have been caused by third parties acting unlawfully, such as oil thieves who drill holes in pipelines, or saboteurs,’ a company spokesperson said. ‘This criminality is the cause of the majority of spills in the Bille and Ogale claims, and we maintain that Shell is not liable for the criminal acts of third parties or illegal refining. These challenges are managed by a joint venture which Shell’s former subsidiary operated, using its expertise in spill response and clean-up.’

Experts who spoke to Global Insight said that the case is part of a growing trend of climate litigation against multinational companies over alleged failures to prevent environmental harms overseas. ‘Companies are increasingly under pressure to take responsibility, not just for their own operations but also for third parties in respect of human rights and environmental harms,’ says Lucy Blake, an investigations partner and co-chair of Human Rights and Global Strategy at Jenner & Block in London.

Blake says recently introduced corporate due diligence and transparency requirements in the EU are another example of the growing pressure on companies to root out human rights harms and environmental misconduct in their business operations.

Olawuyi, who is also an environmental law professor at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, says that domestic courts in Africa are also responding to growing ESG trends noting that the notion of continued liability for business-related pollution was recently recognised by the Kenyan Supreme Court. ‘As more African countries adopt national action plans on business and human rights, we expect to see even more domestic case law developments that emphasize ESG obligations of businesses and investors,’ he says. ‘There is a strong business case, in terms of cost, reputation, and effectiveness, for business enterprises, and their lawyers alike, to comprehensively understand and manage the wide range of ESG-related risks across their entire value chains.’

Anaïs Tobalagba, senior legal advisor and natural resources lead at Global Rights Compliance, found it notable in the ruling that the judge recognised that under certain circumstances environmental harm could engage the right to life. ‘That is very much aligned with emerging jurisprudence worldwide, which is taking into consideration the intersection between environmental harm and human rights,’ she says.

Tobalagba says that the decision closely aligns with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights which recognise that environmental harm can have significant human rights impacts and that businesses have a responsibility to protect human rights.

Babatunde Ajibade, Chair of the IBA’s Section on Public and Professional Interest who provided expert evidence on Nigerian law in the proceedings, says that one of the reasons the claimants took Shell to court in the UK is because of the perception that the same standards applied to oil companies in other parts of the world, to prevent and address pollution, haven’t been upheld in Nigeria. ‘A lot of historical pollution has taken place that has not been cleaned up and that continues to cause severe damage to the environment and to the inhabitants that live in those oil producing communities,’ he says.

Ajibade, who is also the managing partner at SPA Ajibade & Co in Nigeria, says that he commends the claimants for their ‘perseverance’ with the litigation, which has lasted for over a decade. ‘I salute their efforts, and I urge them to keep at it because what is left to see the claim to a conclusion is much less than what they have been through already’.

Olawuyi says that the continued liability doctrine established in the case could encourage many more Nigerian communities to file claims over legacy oil pollution. ‘I also expect the implications to be far reaching beyond Nigeria, across Africa and even to other continents where local communities have had to bear the burden of irresponsible business practices for decades,’ he says.

Image credit: Anton/AdobeStock.com