Abstract

The forum non conveniens (FNC) doctrine has notoriously represented a major obstacle for victims of human rights abuses by multinational enterprises (MNEs) to bring their civil claims transnationally before home State courts where overseas rights-holders have more realistic prospects of obtaining substantial justice. The withdrawal of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union, the ensuing inapplicability of the Brussels I Regulation as of 1 January 2021, and the non-accession of the UK to the Lugano Convention had the effect of reviving the application of English common law rules on jurisdiction and, with them, the relevance of the FNC doctrine as a ground for judges to prevent cases from moving forward before English courts when another more appropriate forum exists. The article critically analyses the recent decision in the Limbu and other v Dyson Technology case, with which the High Court of England and Wales – for the first time after Brexit – dismissed a transnational civil claim involving forced labour allegations on FNC grounds. The case represents a major setback in establishing accountability of MNEs for overseas human rights abuses in their corporate groups and supply chains, and the materialisation of the much-feared negative impact of the revival of FNC on transnational business and human rights claims in English courts