In a few days, a court will witness two of the world’s leading oil companies argue over who was to blame for Britain’s biggest explosion, which left 43 people injured. The explosion was so big and powerful, that it could be heard as far away as the Netherlands.
The major oil companies are facing compensation claims of an estimated £700 million which was a result of the blast that occurred at the Brucefield fuel storage depot in Hertfordshire, which took place in December 2005.

The case will last for around 13 weeks and Mr Justice David Steel will be sitting in the High Court listening to both arguments. The trial will begin tomorrow. This argument is thought to be one of the most major and costly cases of the year in the UK, with a reported spent fee already reaching £60 million going towards lawyers payment.

Total, which is the majority shareholder in the company that operated the Bruncefield plant has admitted partial liability for some of the damage that was caused by the explosion. The oil companies are facing compensation claims from a number of businesses ranging from small businesses who claim they ‘suffered uninsured losses’ such as temporary relocation expenses, to more powerful businesses such as Shell and BP whose operations were disrupted by the blast. There are also the 272 local homeowners who are seeking for compensation for the damage they received plus relocation costs.

With Total taking some of the blame, lawyers believe that the trial will see a lot of legal manipulation as Total’s junior partner is hoping to avoid any payout. Although the companies jointly own Hertfordshire Oil Storage Limited (HOSL) which operate Bruncefield depot, Chevron is expected to argue that it was just a silent partner in the business undertaking and that the everyday running of the plant laid solely on the responsibility of Total.

Chevron’s argument will accuse Total of ‘systematic’ negligence in running the plant, despite Chevron itself owning a 40% stake of the company. In response to this accusation, Total did admit that the blast was partly the fault of the supervisor on duty, but claimed that damage to the properties 451 metres away could have been predicted. Therefore, the properties that were in proximity of the plant will have to prove that their losses were foreseeable.

However, Total, is not rolling over easy, as it is reported that will fight to ensure that Chevron takes some of the blame.

A spokesman from Total stated that there was: “no argument”. He furthered that the claimants whose properties lie within the ratio of the plant will receive a payout either from just one or both parties: “It’s just a question of who will pick up the bill.”

A solicitor representing the local homeowners stated that there was “no genuine effort” from the oil company to compensate them and that they have not taken into account the distress and months of inconvenience which resulted from the blast.

Total responded by claiming that the oil companies have put into place personal injury and other claims brought by local homeowners affected by the detonation.


Catherine has more articles pertaining to compensation claims