BHP hit with $253M UK legal costs demand

BHP (ASX, LSE, NYSE: BHP) could be on the hook for at least £189 million ($253 million) in legal costs after a U.K. court found last month that the world’s largest miner was liable for Brazil’s 2015 Mariana dam collapse, which killed 19 people and caused the country’s worst environmental disaster.

Lawyers for victims told the High Court in London on Wednesday that they were the “clear overall winner” in a November liability ruling and that BHP should make an immediate interim payment toward costs. The claim ranks among the largest cost demands in British legal history, according to the Financial Times.

The request includes legal fees and about £44 million ($60 million) spent on walk-in centres and call centre staff used to communicate with about 620,000 affected people. The court has already ruled that BHP should pay at least some costs immediately following the liability finding.

A second trial is scheduled for October 2026 to determine damages linked to a £36 billion claim, believed to be the largest ever brought in England. BHP, which is seeking permission to appeal the liability decision, described the cost demand as “shocking” and said the figures were overstated.

In written submissions, BHP’s lawyers said the claimants failed to properly explain their cost breakdown and urged the court to exclude large portions of it. They also rejected as “absurd” a request for an interim payment of 60%, or about £113 million, before a final ruling on costs.

Under the spotlight

The case has drawn close scrutiny from the legal industry following tensions between the claimants’ law firm, Pogust Goodhead, and its funder that nearly derailed the action late in the process. BHP argued that Pogust Goodhead’s “wealthy funders” spent vast sums without regard to proportionality, a stance it said was reflected in the size of the claim.

BHP is asking the court to defer any decision on costs until after the second phase of proceedings, arguing that overall success cannot yet be judged because liability has been established only in principle.

The dispute echoes a recent and controversial controversial Australian ruling tied o the same dam collapse, where the Federal Court allowed law firms in a shareholder class action against BHP to lift their fee share from 15% to 50%, ultimately taking A$48 million ($32 million) from a A$110 million settlement and fuelling concerns over transparency and oversight.