Despite Vale’s efforts to extricate itself from assuming half of the potential liabilities, the Court of Appeal shut down this avenue in November. Vale’s response? Calling for the dispute’s resolution under Brazilian arbitration law—a plea heard at the High Court.
The Complex Ownership and Operational Landscape
Vale’s defense elaborates on the dam’s ownership, lying with Samarco Mineração SA—a joint venture straddling BHP and Vale. Samarco, they claim, operated autonomously from the mining juggernauts.
“Vale refutes any insinuation that its personnel, at any crucial juncture before the collapse, had inkling of the dam’s compromised safety,” the company stated.
Market Dynamics and Legal Boundaries
In an intriguing twist, Vale paints itself as a “direct competitor” to Samarco in the tightly-knit Brazilian and European iron ore markets. They argue that compliance with Brazilian and EU competition law limited their involvement in Samarco’s operational choices.
The Twists and Turns of Legal Recourse
Many claimants have sought reparation through Brazilian courts, with some cases conclusively dismissed. Vale contends that bringing these allegations to the High Court would be judicial overreach.
