Business (https://braziljournal.

com/negocios/)

How Pogust Goodhead Uses Class Actions to Upset Giants

February 19, 2024

André Jankavski

LONDON – At the end of January, around 30 Brazilians armed with posters came here to The
Rolls Building, the building that houses the British Judiciary, to protest against BHP.

That day began the discussion of the timeline of the process in which the Anglo-Australian
company – which owns 50% of Samarco – is defendant for the disaster that occurred in
Mariana, in 2015, which left 19 dead and caused great damage to the environment.

Among those present were people who lost children, the place where they lived, or who
suffered losses due to environmental damage – and also mayors of the affected cities, such as
Celso Cota, Mariana's representative.

But no one got there with their own resources. The law firm
Pogust Goodhead sponsored the demonstration – and is the
author of the collective action that brought together 700,000
people and entities harmed by the collapse of the dam and
which seeks compensation of R$230 billion from BHP and
Vale, the owner of the other half of the dam. Samarco.

The office likes noise.

Pogust Goodhead emerged in 2018, after lawyer Tom Goodhead, who already worked in the
area of ​human rights, provided consultancy on Dieselgate , the case in which Volkswagen was
found guilty of purposefully tampering with the diesel emissions of some vehicles .

More than being a consultant, Goodhead saw that he could participate more actively in these
collective causes. Still in 2018, a Brazilian lawyer presented Mariana's case to Goodhead, who
quickly became interested in the story.

The office's modus operandi is to look for victims injured by major disasters, bring them
together in a single case and seek jurisdiction in Europe or the United States.

“The judicial system is slow in any country in the world, but while in the UK a process lasts 5 to
7 years, in Brazil appeals can cause the process to be delayed for 20, 30 years,” Goodhead told
Brazil Journal (https://www.instagram.com/braziljournal/) . (Did you hear, CNJ?)

Aproveitando que a BHP tem sede em Londres, o escritório buscou foro na Justiça inglesa. Em
2022, a própria BHP conseguiu incluir a Vale como corresponsável pelo pagamento de metade
da multa, caso seja condenada.

Além do caso de Mariana, o Pogust toca hoje 27 ações coletivas, incluindo um processo na
Holanda contra a Braskem pelo desastre de Maceió (a Braskem tem uma subsidiária financeira
por lá); uma ação na Alemanha contra a TÜV SÜD – que certificou as barragens da Vale em
Brumadinho; e um processo no Reino Unido contra a Cutrale, a gigante da citricultura
brasileira, por acusação de formação de cartel.
Para cuidar de todos os casos, o escritório tem um exército de mil funcionários, sendo 600
advogados – metade deles brasileiros. Porém, como conta com a ajuda de advogados locais para
buscar vítimas, o total de profissionais relacionados aos casos pode chegar a 5 mil.

O caso de Mariana é o maior de todos – tanto em valores quanto em custos para o escritório.
Até agora, contando gastos de viagens e custas do processo, o Pogust calcula ter gasto mais de
150 milhões de libras nesse processo.

Apesar de já ter ganho processos contra empresas como Uber, British Airways e Volkswagen, o
dinheiro dos honorários e das incumbências não seria suficiente para arcar com todos os custos
do caso de Mariana.

Por isso, o Pogust partiu para se financiar via litigation funding. Em 2019, a advogada Ana
Carolina Salomão, com experiência de dez anos na Faria Lima e passagens pelo JP Morgan, Itaú
BBA e BWI, entrou no Pogust para cuidar da captação.

Desde então, o escritório já levantou 750 milhões de libras com gestoras como Jive, Vinci SPS e
Prisma Capital. A maior parte do dinheiro, no entanto, vem na forma de empréstimos que
custam cerca de 20% ao ano. Em outra modalidade, o investidor cobra uma taxa menor, mas
participa do resultado.

“Quem começou a financiar o escritório no início pode ter retornos similares aos vistos em um
Series A de startups,” disse Ana Carolina, que é a CIO do Pogust Goodhead.

O risco dos casos é alto: o processo contra a BHP já chegou a ser recusado pela justiça britânica.
Em 2018, juízes de primeira e segunda instâncias negaram que o Reino Unido era a jurisdição
certa para se ter esse tipo de processo.

Mais do que isso: a decisão de primeira instância definiu o escritório como um “cassino”. O
Pogust Goodhead foi condenado a pagar 16 milhões de libras em custas do processo.

“Tínhamos um seguro, que não era suficiente para arcar

com os prejuízos,” disse Ana Clara. “Tivemos que bater
nas portas dos investidores pedindo dinheiro para entrar
com uma ação rescisória contra a decisão do primeiro
juiz.”

A própria advogada definiu a tentativa como uma

“loucura”, mas deu resultado: a suprema corte inglesa
aceitou o pedido, anulou as decisões anteriores e deu
jurisdição para que o processo corresse na justiça
britânica.

The office, however, has been the target of criticism – especially from companies that are being
sued. In the market, there is strong talk against Pogust Goodhead: the office has been
compared to “vultures looking for carrion”.

One of the criticisms is the charging of fees to victims, which can reach 30%. Ana, however,
says that the average is 22.5%, as there are many cases of pro bono work , such as work for
indigenous people and quilombolas.

Goodhead doesn't see a problem with this charge.

“This is a slice of money that would never be recovered. So, it's a more than fair value. Every
lawyer who works is paid, as are those at companies,” said the lawyer.

In Mariana's case, there are also doubts about the value of the process. As Samarco created the
Renova Foundation to manage all the money allocated to redress the cases – and has already
paid almost R$35 billion in compensation –, in addition to responding to other processes in the
Brazilian courts, BHP and Vale claim that the process London may generate double payments.

The office denies that this will happen, and its lawyers claim that the amount paid so far is still
insufficient to compensate for the damage caused.

With the first phase of the trial set for October this year, Goodhead said he is open to a
settlement with BHP. According to him, it is in the interests of all his clients that this process is
not delayed for years.

“An agreement is the best thing to do, but it has to be fair for our customers,” he said.

BHP told Brazil Journal that it will continue to defend itself in the process and refute the
requests made in the action in England.

According to the company, the action “is unnecessary as it duplicates issues already covered by
ongoing repair work, under the supervision of Brazilian courts, and the subject of ongoing legal
proceedings.”