"Brexit and business and human rights litigation in England", 26 Sep 2016

While a big uncertainty looms over the political questions surrounding the process of the UK’s exit from the EU, the repercussions go far beyond the UK – and  some of those wondering “what next” are likely overseas victims of human rights abuses by British corporations.  The question remains as to what happens to all the EU law that either the UK has transposed into its legal order...Brussels I Regulation...prescribes the rules on jurisdiction of member state courts...It has been predicted that the UK's adherence to the Brussels I regime “is likely to be significantly modified, if not entirely replaced, in the event of Brexit”...In England, the forum non conveniens doctrine (FNC) used to be a major challenge to bringing suit against an MNE domiciled in England for harm caused overseas by its subsidiaries...Article 2 of Brussels I...blocked the use of the FNC doctrine by English courts...Even though we are yet to see a ruling that holds the parent company liable for harm caused by an overseas subsidiary, lawyers continue filing strategic cases with English courts with the confidence that they would not lose years battling an FNC challenge...If the UK leaves the EU and no longer complies with Brussels I, without a post-exit deal between the two entities that incorporates equivalent provisions, the FNC defence is likely to be resurrected in business and human rights litigation against MNEs domiciled in England.  This would be a big step back for access to justice in England for overseas victims of business abuse.