header-logo header-logo

19 February 2020
Issue: 7875 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

No liability for Tonkalili

A group of 142 claimants from Sierra Leone has lost its Court of Appeal case against a UK-based mining company for events the trial judge described as ‘violent chaos during the course of which many villagers were variously beaten, shot, gassed, robbed, sexually assaulted, squalidly incarcerated and, in one case, killed’

The claimants live in Tonkolili and the defendants were previously the owners and operators of a large iron ore mine in the district, Tonkolili Iron Ore (formerly a subsidiary of African Minerals). The violence occurred in 2010 and 2012 when the mining company took over a number of villages, and the villagers’ protests were met with excessive force by the Sierra Leone Police.

The claimants argued Tonkolili was liable for the actions of the police, which they denied. They had seven grounds of action, including: vicarious liability for torts committed both by company employees and police; accessory liability, given the company supplied the police with money, vehicles and accommodation during the 2012 incident; malicious prosecution; and breach of a non-delegable duty in respect of an extra hazardous activity carried out negligently.

During the High Court hearing in 2018, Mr Justice Turner and the legal teams for both sides travelled to Sierra Leone so the judge could take evidence from witnesses in person―the first time a High Court hearing has done so.

The mining company’s argument included that there is no liability in negligence for the criminal acts of third parties, and that in order to establish tortious liability for common design, something more was needed than the foreseeability that the police might over-react.

Ruling in Kalma v African Minerals [2020] EWCA Civ 144, the court dismissed the appeal on all grounds.

Martyn Day, senior partner, Leigh Day, representing the claimants, said his clients were disappointed and would be seeking leave to appeal.

Issue: 7875 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll