Australia's $2 billion PFAS lawsuit against 3M advances in Federal Court
Australia's Commonwealth has begun its $2 billion lawsuit against 3M in the Federal Court in Melbourne, with a judge describing the case as daunting. The claim concerns alleged PFAS contamination at 28 defence bases across the country, where firefighting foam containing the chemicals was used. The government is seeking to recover the cost of investigating, managing and remediating soil and water contamination.
Sponsored
At the first case management hearing on Friday, the two sides agreed the matter was large and complex. The court heard that a 1,600-page statement of claim has been filed, setting out allegations linked to the legacy use of AFFF firefighting foam. Justice Catherine Button said she had never seen a claim like this and that calling it daunting would be an understatement, adding that it was daunting for everyone involved.
The Commonwealth announced in March that it was seeking damages from US-based 3M and 3M Australia. It says the claim is the largest legal action ever brought by the federal government and alleges the company withheld results of its own environmental laboratory testing showing significant adverse environmental effects associated with its PFAS products. 3M has said it will defend itself through the legal process. The case is significant because it brings together environmental contamination, defence infrastructure and a potentially very large public liability bill.
PFAS chemicals have been the subject of litigation and regulatory scrutiny in several countries because they persist in the environment and can be costly to remove. In this case, the Commonwealth is trying to shift remediation costs away from taxpayers and onto the manufacturer it says is responsible for the contamination. The hearing also highlights the scale of the alleged impact across defence communities, including Williamtown in New South Wales, which is among the affected sites.
Sponsored
The government says the contamination stems from firefighting foam used at bases over many years, and the claim covers both past and ongoing remediation work. 3M has manufactured PFAS chemicals since the 1950s, and the company has faced other lawsuits internationally over similar contamination claims. What remains unclear at this stage is how the court will manage the size and complexity of the case, and how 3M will respond to the allegations in detail. The next steps are likely to focus on case management and the timetable for the litigation.
The outcome could have major financial implications for the Commonwealth and wider significance for other PFAS-related claims.
Sponsored
