Swedish
A property had been damaged by pollution through operations of a company that previously used it. The company then ceased with its operations and the property was bought by a company that was later acquired by the company Kustbostäder. Kustbostäder did not continue with the previous operations, but completed earthworks in order to prepare the property for future use. The question in the case was who would be responsible for the cleanup needed for the serious environmental damage done to the property.
As a main rule, the responsibility for clearing up environmental damage lies with the operator of the polluting act. In accordance with chapter 10 section 6 of the Environmental Code, joint liability is presumed when there have been several operators contributing to the environmental damage.
In this case, it was clear that the company Värmdöstrand operated the industrial activities that caused the damage. The work that had later been done by Kustbostäder had instead been made to repair the damage. The Supreme Court had to decide whether these actions could be seen as having added to the environmental damage.
The Supreme Court concluded that the earthworks by Kustbostäder had to some extent caused the spread of the pollution to surrounding areas. The companies therefore had joint liability. This was seen as important not to delay after treatment of the property. The case then becomes a civil dispute regarding the right of recourse between the two companies.