The Court of Appeal has issued a landmark judgment in Alame & Others v. Shell PLC and The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1500, allowing a challenge against the "global claim" approach to an environmental claim against Shell endorsed by the High Court. The Court of Appeal accepted the Claimants' argument that a "lead case" approach would be more efficient. This decision provides critical guidance on case management for complex environmental claims in the English courts, clarifying that the right of a litigant to bring a claim and determine how it is proved should be "respected in all normal circumstances".

The claim is brought by approximately 14,000 residents of the Bille and Ogale regions in Nigeria which have been affected by more than 100 oil leaks resulting from Shell's infrastructure. The Claimants allege that negligence by Shell's UK-based parent company (Shell PLC) and its Nigerian subsidiary (Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria) caused extensive pollution and contamination of water sources.

In 2023, the High Court ruled that the Claimants must show a causal link between their individual losses and specific acts of pollution. Given the scale and complexity of the case, the Claimants faced significant challenges in doing so. By the time of the High Court hearing, only five had been able to establish such a causal link.

This difficulty prompted the High Court to adopt a "global claim" approach instead of a "lead case" approach. Under the global claim approach (which is commonly used in contractual disputes in the area of construction), the Claimants would have to prove that Shell was responsible for all pollution causing the environmental contamination. If there were any other sources of pollution that contributed to their losses but to which Shell did not contribute, each individual's claim would fail.

The Court of Appeal set aside the High Court's ruling. It held that "no judge or court is entitled to require a party to establish their case by a particular method" and that "until the point is reached where a claim is to be dismissed or stayed, the right of a litigant to bring the claim and the freedom to determine how it intends to prove its claim should be respected in all normal circumstances".

Instead of a global claim, the Court of Appeal recommended using the more typical lead case approach, whereby one or more representative claimants act as focal points for the litigation, concentrating resources on specific cases that embody broader issues and so making the litigation more manageable and efficient.

The Court of Appeal also dismissed an appeal by the Defendants, who had sought to overturn the High Court's grant of permission to the Claimants to amend their Particulars of Claim.

The Court of Appeal's judgment has significant implications, including in relation to the role of lead cases in efficient case management of complex environmental litigation. This decision also reaffirms the English courts' readiness to hear complex international environmental claims and addresses associated procedural and jurisdictional challenges.