The website of the Frisse Wind foundation is full of stories from the “neighbors of Tata Steel”. A school principal talks about the enormous clouds of rusty brown smoke that occasionally pass by his school. A heavily pregnant woman is concerned about her unborn child: it also inhales the dirty air she breathes. A local resident’s chronic headache disappeared when he was in Spain for a month.
And now that foundation is taking the steel factory to court: it is demanding 1.4 billion euros from the steel factory, on behalf of more than 300,000 (former) local residents. According to the foundation, they have suffered health damage, their ‘enjoyment’ has diminished and their houses are worth less because they are close to the Tata Steel factories. On average, the foundation demands 5,000 euros per person, but for residents who live closer to Tata Steel, the amount can rise to tens of thousands of euros.
Recognition
“Tata Steel makes a lot of money, but the price for pollution is paid by local residents,” says John Beer, board member of the foundation. “We think it is reasonable that they receive money for this.” But even more important is the recognition that Tata Steel causes damage, says Beer. “That is the primary reason for the mass claim. That recognition is very important for local residents.”
The fact that residents living near a factory are asking for compensation due to pollution is special, says Xandra Kramer. She is a professor of private law at the Erasmus School of Law, and specializes in mass claims. “The cases in which damages are requested usually concern consumers who have suffered damage at a company, for example because a product is defective.”
The Frisse Wind Foundation has been fighting with Tata Steel for some time and wants Coating Gas Factory 2, Tata Steel’s most polluting factory, to be closed. The foundation was set up by parents who were concerned about the health of their children. The foundation pointed cameras at the factory, which is monitored 24 hours a day. Based on these images, the environmental agency, the supervisor, can intervene, they hope.
In 2021, Frisse Wind, together with lawyer Bénédicte Ficq, filed a complaint against Tata Steel, alleging that it had deliberately and without permission released harmful substances. The Public Prosecution Service has been investigating the case since 2022; it is still not clear whether prosecution will proceed.
Supporters
The foundation has been working on the mass claim for the past two years. “It was an idea from someone from the foundation’s supporters,” says board member John Beer. He later joined the board; Beer is a lawyer with expertise in the field of damage claims and has therefore been asked by the foundation to become a board member. He himself does not live nearby.
Beer transformed Frisse Lucht into a foundation that can file a mass claim: it is then legally required that there is a Supervisory Board with expertise in the field of mass claims. It is there now. The articles of association had to be rewritten, and the foundation must demonstrate that it has sufficient support. There are a thousand people who have registered to participate in the mass claim, says Beer. In addition, experts conducted research to provide ammunition for the summons, which was sent to the court on Friday.
“There are a number of strong aspects in the summons,” says Professor Kramer. “The foundation is asking for money because homes would be worth less due to their proximity to Tata Steel. You can calculate that, you have good comparison material.” In addition, Kramer points to reports from RIVM, among others, from 2023, which showed that on average the residents of Wijk aan Zee Live 2.5 months shorter than the average Dutch person, due to the harmful substances from Tata Steel.
Compensation fund
But it is very difficult to prove that a company is also liable for this, says Kramer. “You have to prove that the damage was caused by Tata Steel and nothing else. But it is also important that Tata Steel had knowledge of this and failed to intervene. That is very difficult.”
Kramer points to another class action claim, involving leaking breast implants. “That was a simpler case than this. It seemed clear that there was something wrong with the breast implants, reports were published that there were dangers and they were ultimately withdrawn from the market. And yet the judge concluded that the company behind the implants was not negligent. The requirements to hold a company liable are high.”
Still, the Frisse Wind foundation thinks it has a good chance. “The factual substantiation is impressive,” says Beer. He points out that Tata Steel has been convicted several times for not following the rules.
“It would actually be best if there was a settlement,” says Kramer. This option is also expressly left open in the summons: it includes a proposal to set up a compensation fund. “Tata Steel does not have to admit all liability, but it would acknowledge that local residents are experiencing damage,” says Kramer. “If it turns out that there is actually damage, it will be paid from that fund. Tata Steel can make a good impression with this, and say: if there are problems, we will solve them.”
The amount in that compensation fund will be lower than 1.4 billion euros, Kramer thinks.
The journalistic principles of NRC