The Evolution of Business and Human Rights Litigation against Multinational Companies

This article will examine the evolution of business and human rights litigation against United Kingdom (UK) based multinational companies (MNCs) commenced by the victims of their alleged wrongdoing abroad in wake of the UK Supreme Court’s decisions in Vedanta v Lungowe and Okpabi v Shell. It will be argued that a methodologically pluralist private international law’s symbiotic relationship with the incremental development of the duty of care in negligence in the law of torts is carving avenues for access to justice for aggrieved foreign litigants. These developments are of significance for transnational corporate accountability. There is, however, an underlying need to pause, reflect and assess whether these developments justifiably distort the value neutrality of the law on jurisdiction and whether the extension of the duty of care in penumbral cases is warranted. In the process, the post-Brexit private international law regime’s implications for the viability of such claims against MNCs will be assessed. In particular, Scots law's and English law’s response to this emerging litigation phenomenon will be analysed with reference to the paradigmatic appellate court decisions in Campbell v James Finlay (Kenya) Ltd and Limbu v Dyson Technology Ltd respectively. A perspective will be offered on how the law should develop to preserve its internationalist values whilst balancing the countervailing imperative of the provision of access to justice in appropriate cases.