Civil Procedure  /  [2026] EWHC 2332 (KB)

Civil Procedure · The King's Bench Division of the High Court

Alame & Ors v Shell Plc & Anor

Court The King's Bench Division of the High CourtDate 10 September 2026Citation [2026] EWHC 2332 (KB)Source Find Case LawAlso filed under Tort / Personal Injury

Checked against the judgment on 11 September 2026 · how we verify

Facts

The claimants are individuals and communities from the Bille and Ogale areas of the Niger Delta. They allege that between 2011 and 2013 crude oil spilled from pipelines, wellheads and associated infrastructure operated by the defendants, Shell plc and Renaissance Africa Energy Company Limited (formerly The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd), contaminating water sources and destroying mangrove forest. They put liability under the Oil Pipelines Act 1990, under section 37 of the First Schedule of the Petroleum Act 1969, and in negligence, nuisance and the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Four sets of proceedings, an individual claim and a community claim for each area, were issued between June 2015 and January 2017. This decision concerned only the Bille claims. The defendants' jurisdiction challenge was finally resolved by the Supreme Court in Okpabi v Royal Dutch Shell Plc. Because causation had not been pleaded spill by spill, the claims were then labelled "global claims". The Court of Appeal allowed the claimants' appeal against May J's order of 15 March 2024, which had managed the claims on that basis. May J then ordered disclosure and full particulars of causation. In June 2026 the claimants served a Re-Re-Re-Amended Particulars of Claim. It pleaded a "primary" case that the defendants' systemic failures caused all the 2011–2013 spills and resulting damage in and around Bille, including spills not identified. The alternative was that those failures increased the frequency, duration and volume of spills and the damage caused. A "secondary" case rested on 106 identified spills. The defendants objected to the primary case. The claimants also sought permission to amend their aggravated damages claim. The dispute there was whether that issue should be heard at the liability trial listed for May 2027.

What did the court decide?

Four things on this page are for subscribers:

  • The decision: what the court actually held
  • The issues: the questions it had to answer
  • The reasoning: how it got there, in its own logic
  • The case history: every step, court by court

CaseLawDigest reads every judgment published on Find Case Law for England and Wales, files it by practice area, and writes a summary a practitioner can use. One weekly PDF per area, and the full archive here.

One practice area is £19 a month, and the weekly PDF lands in your inbox.

See the plans Or take the free digest

On your firm’s subscription? Set up your access. Already have an account? Sign in.