Forum Non Conveniens and Transnational Litigations on Business and Human Rights: The English Court of Appeal's Decision in Limbu v. Dyson

This article examines the recent decision by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, which rejected the application of the "forum non conveniens" doctrine in "Limbu v. Dyson". The case involves claims brought by Nepalese and Bangladeshi migrant workers alleging forced labour and abusive living conditions at Malaysian factories supplying products and components for Dyson-branded goods. Reversing a previous High Court’s ruling, the Court of Appeal determined that the claims could proceed in England, which was «clearly and distinctly the appropriate forum» to hear the case. In reaching this conclusion, the Court of Appeal gave crucial and overdue consideration to, "inter alia", the major imbalances of power affecting transnational litigation on business and human rights, as well as the role of decision-making (or the lack thereof) by anchor defendants in their place of domicile in establishing the jurisdiction of home state courts. The decision is significant as it appears to reinforce the position of overseas victims of business-related human rights abuses and potentially pave the way for important developments concerning corporate accountability for human rights harms in global supply chains.