The UK Supreme Court has upheld two lower-court rulings that found British energy multinational Shell PLC (LSE:SHEL, NYSE:SHEL) was off the hook for a devastating spill of 40,000 barrels worth of crude oil in the Niger Delta in 2011.
Two Shell subsidiaries were relieved of legal responsibility due to the Nigerian claimants exceeding the six-year time limit for initiating legal action against the oil giant.
This case was part of a larger legal battle fought by Shell in London courts, as residents of Nigeria's oil-producing Niger Delta sought justice for the pollution, conflict, and corruption associated with the region's oil and gas industry.
Some 27,800 individuals and 457 communities involved in the lawsuit argued that their lands and waterways had been polluted by the oil slick, leading to damage to farming, fishing, drinking water, mangrove forests, and religious sites.
When the spill occurred in 2011, it spread for more than 923 square kilometres, marking the worst spill in over a decade.
However, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected an argument from claimants' lawyers who contended that the ongoing impact of the pollution constituted a "continuing nuisance," which would have exempted them from the time limit.
Shell disputed the allegations made by the claimants, stating that the Bonga spill had been dispersed offshore and had not affected the shoreline. The focus of the ruling was solely on the legal aspect of the case regarding the notion of nuisance.
Two Nigerian citizens appealed the case but also thousands of others were involved in the litigation at lower courts.
Shell is currently involved in another Nigeria-related legal dispute brought by farmers and fishermen from the Ogale and Bille communities.