Lawyer Monthly - October 2023

convince the English High Court, which dismissed its claim in May 2023, finding that ClientEarth had failed to establish a prima facie case that the directors had breached their duties to Shell, and noting that the Court was “not prepared to intervene in the commercial strategy and decision-making or superimpose new duties onto directors”. The decision represents a setback for those seeking greater accountability for directors of listed companies which cause environmental damage. Parent Company Liability Claims against parent companies have been utilised, seemingly with some success, for the purposes of holding companies said to be causing environmental damage to account. The UK Supreme Court unanimously held in Okpabi and ors v Royal Dutch Shell plc and another [2021] UKSC 3 and Lungowe v (1) Vedanta Resources Plc and (2) Konkola Copper Mines Plc [2019] UKSC 20 that a parent company may be held legally responsible for environmental harms brought about by its foreign subsidiaries. 42 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2023 The Supreme Court guidance in these cases emphasises that parent company liability arises not only in the narrow situation where there is a relationship of ‘control’ between parent and subsidiary – it can arise when a subsidiary simply adopts a group-wide policy. Time will tell, but for now it seems that bringing a claim against a parent company could prove to be an effective route to establishing liability of global companies for environmental failings outside the UK. Greenwashing ‘Greenwashing’ is misleading or deceptive publicity used by an organisation to portray an environmentally responsible public image. Bodies such as the Competition and Markets Authority and Advertising Standards Agency are already Claims against parent companies have been utilised, seemingly with some success, for the purposes of holding companies said to be causing environmental damage to account.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk3Mzkz