Article
Author
This article examines whether the English common law of torts can effectively address contemporary corporate environmental harms and whether such a role is normatively justified. While tort law initially appears unsuitable - due to its structural incompatibility with diffuse environmental damage, its retrospective focus, and litigation inefficiencies - this article proposes cautious optimism. First, drawing on lessons from the French Civil Code, the common law’s historical adaptability, and a modern reassessment of causality, it contends that the doctrinal shortcomings of environmental tort law may be surmountable. Concurrently, it proposes that tort law’s participation in a multi-dimensional legal response is justified through its capacity to complement environmental policy frameworks. Second, these claims are substantiated by recent Supreme Court jurisprudence from the United Kingdom (Vedanta v Lungowe and Okpabi v Shell) and New Zealand (Smith v Fonterra), which respectively recognise a duty of care owed by parent companies for environmentally harmful acts of their subsidiaries, and the potential for tortious liability in relation to corporate greenhouse gas emissions. Whilst conceding that imperfections remain, this article concludes that English tort law has an increasingly significant role to play in a holistic legal response to corporate environmental harms.
Keywords: tort law, corporate environmental harm, parent company liability, climate change litigation
How to Cite: Jhaveri, M. (2026) “A Tort Law Response to Corporate Environmental Harms?”, UCL Journal of Law and Jurisprudence. 15(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.14324/111.444.2052-1871.2124