GBAF Logo
Global Banking & Finance Awards® 2026 Nominations open, free to enter Nominate now →
3M to argue Australia's $1.4 billion 'forever chemicals' lawsuit legally flawed, court hears - Finance news and analysis from Global Banking & Finance Review
Finance

3M to argue Australia's $1.4 billion 'forever chemicals' lawsuit legally flawed, court hears

Published by Global Banking & Finance Review

Posted on October 16, 2026

3 min read

· Last updated: October 16, 2026

Add as preferred source on Google

3M Plans Defense Against $1.4 Billion PFAS Lawsuit Filed by Australia

Landmark PFAS Contamination Lawsuit Overview

By Christine Chen

Background of the Case

SYDNEY, Oct 16 (Reuters) - US conglomerate 3M plans to argue a landmark case brought by Australia over contamination from the company's use of PFAS "forever chemicals" in its firefighting foam is legally flawed, a court heard on Friday. 

The claim against the Minnesota-based chemicals maker and its local unit is the largest ever brought by ​Australia, and seeks more than A$2 billion ($1.38 billion) in damages for past and future costs of contamination across 28 military bases where 3M's products were used.

Australia’s Allegations Against 3M

Australia's case is that 3M knew or ought to have known the foam it made and supplied could damage the environment and harm people, but it failed to warn the government.

The foam's pollution interfered with people's ability to use and enjoy the water and land around the bases, creating what the government says amounted to a "public nuisance" under Australian law for which 3M should pay compensation.

3M’s Legal Response

"On Australian authority, the pleaded case does not comprise public nuisance," 3M's barrister Philip Solomon said at the first case management hearing for the lawsuit on Friday.

"The allegation against us alleged that we, the respondents, had the means to abate the nuisance, that we caused the nuisance, that were responsible for the particular or the special loss associated with the nuisance, and that in a broad sense, we had the ability to control the discharge of the nuisance," he added.

"We will in a number of pages set out why public nuisance as pleaded is not available."

In its defence, expected to be filed on December 11, 3M also plans to question whether another part of Australia's case — that the company breached consumer protection laws by making misleading claims about the foam's features and safety — was time-barred because the alleged conduct occurred decades ago, Solomon said.

PFAS Chemicals and Their Impact

PFAS are a group of manufactured chemicals that are widely used in products resistant to heat, stains, grease and water.

Research has linked exposure to PFAS ​to health issues including liver ​damage, lower birth weight ⁠and testicular cancer.

3M’s History with PFAS in Australia

3M, which has faced thousands ​of lawsuits over alleged PFAS contamination, sold the firefighting foam in Australia from 1966 to 2003.

Government Response and Remediation Efforts

Australia has spent A$1.3 billion in dealing with the impacts of the contamination on the bases, including paying A$408 million in ​legal settlements to affected communities.

The defence department has also treated or removed more than 200,000 ​metric tons ⁠of contaminated soil and treated more than 13 billion litres of water.

Next Steps in the Lawsuit

The case will return to court in December. 

($1 = 1.4445 Australian dollars)

(Reporting by Christine Chen in Sydney; Editing by Kate Mayberry)

Key Takeaways

  • 3M argues Australia’s public nuisance claim over PFAS contamination is legally invalid under Australian law.
  • The company plans to challenge consumer protection allegations on limitation period grounds, saying decades have passed since the alleged misleading conduct.
  • Australia’s case—the largest federal lawsuit in its history—covers contamination at 28 defence bases, with remediation costs already exceeding A$1.3 billion.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main lawsuit against 3M in Australia about?
Australia is suing 3M for over $1.4 billion, claiming its PFAS-based firefighting foam contaminated 28 military bases.
How does 3M plan to defend itself in court?
3M will argue that the public nuisance claim is not legally sufficient under Australian law and may challenge certain claims as time-barred.
What are PFAS and why are they controversial?
PFAS are chemicals resistant to heat, stains, grease, and water, linked to health risks like liver damage and cancer.
How much has Australia spent addressing PFAS contamination?
Australia has spent A$1.3 billion on impacts, including A$408 million in legal settlements and large-scale soil and water treatment.
When is the next court hearing for the 3M PFAS lawsuit?
The case will return to court in December, with further hearings expected after 3M files its defense.

Tags

Related Articles

More from Finance

Explore more articles in the Finance category