The lawsuit was filed as a representative action against Singapore-registered public company PNG Sustainable Development Program (PNG) on behalf of around 15,000 members of certain communities in the Western Province of Papua New Guinea who have been adversely affected. The plaintiffs were represented by TSMP Law Corp. This case is believed to be the first time a representative action of this type and magnitude has been brought in Singapore’s highest court and has implications for similar actions in the future.
PNG had previously held a stake in Ok Tedi Mining, which owns and operates the mine in the affected region. The dividends and other monies from this share were to be used to promote sustainable development in Papua New Guinea as well as to promote the general welfare of the Papua New Guinea people of Papua New Guinea, particularly in the Western Province.
A $1.5 billion lawsuit against a Singapore company seeking redress for around 150,000 people affected by environmental damage in Papua New Guinea has been shot down again, the latest episode in three decades ongoing legal history.
Supreme Court Justice Vinodh Coomaraswamy described the case in his decision last year as a protracted legal battle spanning three decades that originally arose out of the mine and its operations. He described the mine as exceptionally lucrative, generating a significant portion of Papua New Guinea’s gross domestic product, but also exceptionally damaging to the environment in affected communities.
The latest development came in the form of the Singapore Court of Appeal’s decision on Thursday (September 15) to uphold an earlier High Court decision last year to drop the lawsuit.
Mark Seah of Dentons Rodyk defense team leader, said the plaintiffs “attempted to superimpose their own agenda onto the finely calibrated suit of contracts to which (PNG) was party, effectively seeking to rewrite (PNG’s) mission”
In dismissing the claims brought by the plaintiffs, which included allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy by lawful and wrongful means, and unjust enrichment, Judge Coomaraswamy ruled that they had failed to bring their case, adding that PNG the defendant did not owe a legal obligation.
Seah added after the ruling that, The striking of its claims therefore leaves PNG free to pursue its mission enshrined in those treaties, which is to promote the sustainable development of Papua New Guinea, particularly in the Western Province.