Filter
Filter

Filter

Filter content by topic
Housing Management
Asset management
Care and support
Coronavirus
Development
Finance
Fire safety
Markets
Mergers and Acquisitions
Policy
Regulation and Governance
Technology
View All

US court rejects Grenfell survivors’ lawsuit against corporations

A US court has rejected a lawsuit brought by survivors of the Grenfell Tower fire against several of the corporations involved in the fire, ruling that it should be heard in the UK, Inside Housing understands. 

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
The Grenfell Tower fire killed 72 people in June 2017 (picture: Lucy Brown)
The Grenfell Tower fire killed 72 people in June 2017 (picture: Lucy Brown)
Sharelines

A US court has rejected a lawsuit brought by survivors of the Grenfell Tower fire against several of the corporations involved in the fire, ruling that it should be heard in the UK, Inside Housing understands #UKhousing

US court rejects Grenfell survivors’ lawsuit against corporations #UKhousing

Grenfell survivors and bereaved last summer brought the case for civil damages against Arconic and Saint Gobain, the companies responsible for the cladding and insulation respectively, and Whirlpool, which supplied the fridge that caught fire.

But multiple sources familiar with the case told Inside Housing that the court yesterday rejected the case against Arconic and Whirlpool on the basis of “forum” following a hearing last month. The court is understood to have ruled the case should be heard in the UK.

The case against Saint Gobain, the parent company of UK-based insulation supplier Celotex, was dropped in May.

A judgement against the companies in the US could have resulted in damages running to tens of millions of dollars, and the rejection of the lawsuit will come as a blow to the survivors, who must now wait for the conclusion of the lengthy public inquiry to pursue actions in the UK.

However, it is understood that the court did leave open the possibility of consideration of liability under US law and an assessment of appropriate damages. The judgement has not yet been made public.


Read More

Grenfell cladding company accused of using French laws to prevent the release of key documentsGrenfell cladding company accused of using French laws to prevent the release of key documents
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week nine: ‘All I can say is that you will be taken out for a very nice meal very soon’Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week nine: ‘All I can say is that you will be taken out for a very nice meal very soon’
Insulation on Grenfell substituted to avoid delivery delay of just four working daysInsulation on Grenfell substituted to avoid delivery delay of just four working days
Nobody at Grenfell cladding contractor tasked with ‘thinking about fire safety’, inquiry hearsNobody at Grenfell cladding contractor tasked with ‘thinking about fire safety’, inquiry hears

Pennsylvania was selected as the venue for the wrongful death lawsuit because it is the home of the head offices of both Arconic and Saint Gobain.

The case progressed through document disclosure last autumn, with Arconic challenged over its attempt to use French laws to prevent the release of documents to the court.

The panels installed on Grenfell Tower were sold by Arconic Architectural Products SAS – the French arm of the company.

The fire at Grenfell Tower killed 72 people in June 2017 after a fire broke out in a fourth-floor kitchen, travelled through a window and ignited the cladding system that had been installed on the tower’s external walls in a refurbishment completed in 2016.

In his judgement on the first phase of the public inquiry last year, inquiry chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick ruled that the aluminium composite material panels were the “primary cause” of this fire spread, adding that it was “more likely than not” that the combustible Celotex insulation also contributed.

The second phase of the inquiry is ongoing, and is currently hearing evidence from the companies directly involved in the refurbishment.

Witnesses from Arconic and Celotex will be called to give evidence in its second module, which will examine how the products were tested, marketed and sold.

A spokesperson for Arconic said: “The US Court has determined that the UK, and not the US, is the appropriate place for plaintiffs to bring their case relating to the Grenfell Tower fire. We express our deepest sympathy to anyone affected by the tragedy and continue to offer our full support to the authorities as the UK inquiry and Metropolitan Police investigation continue.”

Update at 3.45pm:

This story was updated to make it clear that the case against Saint Gobain was dropped in May.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry phase two: weekly diaries

Grenfell Tower Inquiry phase two: weekly diaries

Week one: A vivid picture of a broken industry

After a week of damning revelations at the opening of phase two of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, Peter Apps recaps the key points

Click here to read the full story

Week two: What is the significance of the immunity application?

Sir Martin Moore-Bick has written to the attorney general requesting protection for those set to give evidence at the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. Peter Apps explains what the move means

Click here to read the full story

Week three: Architects of misfortune

This week saw the lead architects for the Grenfell Tower refurbishment give evidence to the inquiry. Peter Apps runs through the key points

Click here to read the full story

Week four: ‘I didn’t have any perception that it was the monster it’s become’

The architects continued to give evidence this week, outlining a lack of understanding of the fire risk posed by the cladding materials and its design. Nathaniel Barker reports

Click here to read the full story

Week five: ‘No adverse effect in relation to external fire spread’

As the Grenfell Tower Inquiry returns from its long absence, Peter Apps recaps the key points from a week of important evidence from the fire consultants to the refurbishment

Click here to read the full story

Week six: ‘I can’t recall any instance where I discussed the materials with building control’

Nathaniel Barker summarises what we learned from fire engineers Exova, architects Studio E and the early evidence from contractor Rydon

Click here to read the full story

Week seven: ‘I do not think I have ever worked with a contractor operating with this level of nonchalance’

Two key witnesses from contractor Rydon gave evidence this week. Peter Apps recaps some of the key points from a revealing week of evidence

Click here to read the full story

Week eight: ‘It haunts me that it wasn't challenged’

Four witnesses from contractor Rydon gave evidence this week. Lucie Heath recaps what we learned on the last week of evidence before the inquiry breaks for five weeks

Click here to read the full story

Week nine: ‘All I can say is you will be taken out for a very nice meal very soon’

This week the inquiry heard evidence from witnesses at Harley Facades, the sub-contractor responsible for Grenfell Tower’s cladding. Peter Apps recaps the key points

Click here to read the full story

Week 10: ‘As we all know, ACM will be gone rather quickly in a fire!’

As the Grenfell Tower Inquiry entered its 10th week, Jack Simpson recaps the key points from a week of important evidence from the refurbishment’s cladding contractor

Click here to read the full story

Week 11: ‘Did you get the impression Grenfell Tower was a guinea pig for this insulation?’

With witnesses from the cladding subcontractor, the firm which cut the deadly panels to shape and the clerk of works which inspected the job giving evidence this was week full of revelations. Peter Apps recaps the key points

Click here to read the full story

Week 12: ‘Would you accept that was a serious failing on your part?’

With the surveyor who inspected Grenfell Tower for compliance giving evidence, this was a crucial week from the inquiry. Dominic Brady and Peter Apps report

Click here to read the full story

Week 13: ‘Value for money is to be regarded as the key driver for this project’

With consultants to Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) giving evidence, attention at the Grenfell Tower Inquiry turned for this first time to the actions of the TMO and the council. Peter Apps reports

Click here to read the full story

Week 14: ‘Did it not occur to you at this point that your budget was simply too low?’

This week, for the first time in phase two, the inquiry heard from Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation, the landlord that oversaw the fatal refurbishment of Grenfell Tower. Lucie Heath reports

Click here to read the full story

Sign up for our weekly Grenfell Inquiry newsletter

Sign up for our weekly Grenfell Inquiry newsletter

Each week we send out a newsletter rounding up the key news from the Grenfell Inquiry, along with exclusive analysis of what it all means for the social housing sector.

New to Inside Housing? Click here to register and receive the weekly newsletter straight to your inbox

Already have an account? Click here to manage your newsletters

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Add New Comment
You must be logged in to comment.

Related Stories

For general enquiries you can contact Inside Housing at:

3rd Floor, 4 Harbour Exchange Square, Isle of Dogs, London, E14 9GE

Tel: 0207 772 8300

© 2020 Inside Housing
All rights reserved
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn