A major PFAS class action lawsuit against chemical manufacturer 3M has been filed in Victoria’s Supreme Court, and the ABC understands the case involves hundreds of companies and organizations and could result in claims reaching billions of dollars.
The class action was first filed in Victoria’s Supreme Court in late 2024, but documents outlining the case were only recently released to the ABC.
In these documents, plaintiffs’ lawyers say they believe this is Australia’s first class action lawsuit brought against 3M over products containing PFAS.
Because this class action lawsuit is so large, ABC understands that the total amount of damages sought could be even higher than the $2 billion claim recently filed by the federal government in a separate lawsuit against 3M over PFAS contamination at military bases.
3M has vowed to defend itself against both the federal government and the class action lawsuit.
PFAS chemicals are widely used around the world in products such as firefighting foam, cookware, cleaning products, water-resistant fabrics, carpets, and cosmetics to make products more resistant to heat, oil, and water.
What are PFAS chemicals and what do they mean for our health?
The US EPA explains that many of these so-called permanent chemicals “break down very slowly and can accumulate in people, animals, and the environment over time.”
3M and other PFAS product manufacturers are facing a wave of PFAS litigation around the world, with thousands of cases filed in U.S. courts.
Some of these civil cases have been settled for eye-popping sums, such as a 2023 $US10 billion ($14.29 billion) settlement for U.S. public water systems that 3M said was “not an admission of liability.”
The problem has become so big that a Hollywood movie has been made about it. Dark Water stars Mark Ruffalo and tells the story of Rob Bilott, a lawyer who pursues legal claims against chemical manufacturer DuPont over PFAS contamination.
What we know about the Victorian class action lawsuit
The Supreme Court of Victoria recently released to the ABC several documents submitted by law firm Cores Chambers Westgarth, representing the plaintiffs, as part of the Victorian PFAS class action.
The documents reveal that the groups suing 3M include companies and organizations that own or have owned sites in Australia where 3M’s PFAS products were used, companies and organizations that own sites where PFAS has migrated, and companies and organizations that are affected by PFAS affecting water and wastewater systems.
Court documents outline key claims against 3M.
Documents filed by law firm Cores Chambers Westgarth, representing the plaintiffs, list five companies that were part of the Kenos Group as lead plaintiffs.
Qenos was a major plastics and chemicals manufacturer with factories in Altona, Melbourne and Botany, Sydney, until it went into administration in 2024.
An affidavit from Corrs Chambers Westgarth partner Michael Catchpoole states that PFAS-based fire extinguishing foams have been used at the Qenos Altona site since around 1980.
PFAS is best known for its use in firefighting foam. (National Park Service: Jim Peaco)
Catchpool said company records show Qenos purchased 3M light water fire extinguishing foam fire extinguishers between 1998 and 2014.
He said he believed 3M fire extinguishing foam containing PFAS was used at the Altona site “during firefighting training and equipment testing, and during response to fires, chemical spills, and other incidents.”
Catchpool said the EPA sent Kenos a cleanup notice in December 2016 regarding actual or potential PFAS contamination at the Altona facility.
In their complaint, the plaintiffs outline the main claims against 3M in this lawsuit.
The plaintiffs say that before 1980, 3M “knew or should have known that there were potential environmental and human health risks associated with the use of 3M PFAS products.”
They also claim that after that date, 3M knew or should have known that PFAS accumulates in animals and humans, is highly mobile in soil, persists in the environment for long periods of time, and persists in humans, “posing long-term health risks.”
The document also includes the plaintiffs’ allegation that 3M “has concealed and continues to conceal that 3M’s PFAS products, including light water AFFF, pose serious risks to the environment and human health.”
The plaintiffs allege that 3M was “recklessly indifferent to the truth of its safety statements.”
In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs ask the court to order 3M to either remediate PFAS-contaminated sites owned by the organizations they sued or pay compensation to the plaintiffs to do this work.
The plaintiffs are also seeking damages “for misleading and deceptive conduct” by 3M.
US-based 3M has been manufacturing PFAS chemicals used in firefighting foam and household products since the 1950s. (Supply: 3M)
ABC sent 3M a list of questions.
The company said in a statement that it would defend itself against the allegations.
“3M announced in 2000 that it would voluntarily phase out the production of two PFAS compounds, PFOS and PFOA, worldwide,” the company said.
“In 2022, the company announced it would cease manufacturing all PFAS by the end of 2025, a goal achieved.”
The company also said it had “never manufactured PFAS in Australia and ceased selling the products in question in Australia approximately 20 years ago.”
Legal experts say PFAS claims are surging overseas and Australian cases could rise further
Commercial litigation expert Mackenzie Moore, Sydney deputy managing partner at law firm Piper Alderman, has watched PFAS litigation grow globally.
He said litigation actually began in the US after a major civil suit was filed against manufacturer DuPont, but it took another decade for litigation to take off in Australia.
“We brought the first claim in relation to PFAS… focused on Australian Defense Force bases, which actually led to the commencement of a class action against the Commonwealth,” she said.
Moore said a “second wave of litigation” has begun in the last couple of years, which is “really aimed at holding manufacturers accountable.”
Mr Moore said such cases were new in Australia but were “exploding” overseas.
“In the United States, there are over 7,000 lawsuits related to personal injury claims against DuPont and 3M,” she said.
“We have seen some very interesting developments in Europe, including Sweden, where it has been found that residents with high levels of PFAS in their blood can suffer injuries, personal injury.”
Mr Moore said there had been no such findings in Australia, but predicted that the next wave of PFAS-related litigation in Australia would be dominated by personal injury claims.
Around the world, the health effects of PFAS are still being studied.
The Australian Center for Disease Control advises the public that there is “limited evidence of human illness or other clinically significant harm from exposure to PFAS.”
The report advises that some studies have found a link between exposure to certain PFAS chemicals and health problems such as decreased kidney function, lower birth weight in infants, and increased risk of some cancers.
It explains that associations with health outcomes do not support direct causation.
In the United States, environmental protection authorities have advised that scientific studies have shown that exposure to certain levels of PFAS can lead to problems such as increased risk of some cancers, developmental effects or delays in children, and low birth weights.
Researchers say they are still working to understand how harmful PFAS are to people and the environment.
Mr Moore said he expected the most at-risk groups, such as firefighters and some industrial workers, to make the first personal injury claims in Australia.
He said these cases were likely to result in far larger claims than previous cases Australia had brought based on clean-up costs or environmental damage.
