Sonny Zulhuda
“Environmental health (EH) legal risks represent one of the most complex and evolving areas of tort law, particularly as corporations face increasing scrutiny over their environmental impact.“
The insights from a recent workshop at Petronas (conducted by the IIUM Climate Change Policy and Law Centre -CCPLC) illuminate critical aspects of how tort principles apply to environmental health violations and the expanding scope of liability in this domain.
The Foundation of Environmental Tort Liability
Environmental tort liability operates within a framework where traditional tort principles intersect with specialized environmental regulations. Unlike statutory liability, which relies on specific legislative provisions, tort-based environmental claims focus on civil wrongs that cause harm to individuals, communities, or the environment itself. This creates a unique legal landscape where companies must navigate both regulatory compliance and common law obligations.
The question of whether liability rests with the occupier or owner of a facility demonstrates the flexibility of tort principles in environmental contexts. Control becomes the determining factor, reflecting tort law’s emphasis on responsibility flowing from the ability to prevent harm. This principle ensures that those with operational control bear corresponding legal accountability, regardless of formal ownership structures.
Corporate and Individual Accountability
Perhaps most significantly, environmental tort liability can pierce the corporate veil to reach individual executives, particularly CEOs and senior managers. This extension of liability occurs when leaders fail to exercise due diligence in environmental oversight. The legal system recognizes that environmental protection cannot be achieved through corporate structures that shield decision-makers from accountability.
Due diligence in this context requires more than passive compliance; it demands active system implementation and ongoing monitoring. This standard reflects tort law’s evolution to address complex organizational structures where harm may result from systemic failures rather than individual acts. Companies must establish robust environmental management systems and demonstrate continuous oversight to satisfy this heightened standard.
The Dual Nature of Environmental Violations
The ability to pursue environmental incidents through both civil and criminal channels simultaneously highlights the serious nature of environmental harm. While criminal proceedings address societal interests in deterrence and punishment, tort actions provide direct compensation to affected parties. This dual approach ensures comprehensive accountability and reflects society’s recognition that environmental damage often requires multiple legal remedies.
Future Implications and Global Trends
The World Economic Forum’s identification of environmental health issues as dominant global risks over the next decade signals a fundamental shift in legal landscape. As environmental concerns intensify, tort law continues to evolve to address new forms of harm and expand theories of liability. This evolution suggests that environmental tort cases will become increasingly sophisticated, incorporating scientific evidence, long-term health impacts, and complex causation arguments.
The three categories of environmental liability—statutory, strict liability, and torts—work in concert to create a comprehensive framework for environmental protection. Tort liability, with its emphasis on compensation and deterrence, provides essential protection for those harmed by environmental violations while encouraging proactive corporate behavior.
Conclusion
Environmental health legal risks under tort principles represent a dynamic and expanding area of law that demands sophisticated understanding and proactive management. As global environmental challenges intensify, companies must recognize that tort liability extends beyond traditional regulatory compliance to encompass broader duties of care to communities and the environment. The integration of individual executive liability, due diligence requirements, and evolving standards of environmental responsibility creates a legal framework that prioritizes prevention and accountability in environmental protection.
This writeup is based on insights from the half-day Technical Sharing Program with EH Circle delivered by the Climate Change Policy and Law Centre (CCPLC) of Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). Entitled “Legal Perspectives in Environmental Health: Lessons from Law, Risk and Industrial Practice”, the program aimed to enhance the PETRONAS EH Circle’s legal awareness and readiness in addressing EH risks. The program consisted of two sessions, which were structured on modules developed by the CCPLC experts, Assoc. Prof. Datin Dr. Maizatun Mustafa, Prof. Dr. Sharifah Zubaidah Syed Abdul Kader, and Assoc. Prof. Dr. Wan Zulhafiz, for practical relevance and alignment with PETRONAS’ EH priorities.
TRIBUTE 