Q&A: PFAS and microplastics litigation in Europe
June 2025 | SPECIAL REPORT: INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Financier Worldwide Magazine
June 2025 Issue
FW discusses PFAS and microplastics litigation in Europe with Sylvie Gallage-Alwis at Signature Litigation, Philipp Behrendt at Taylor Wessing, Michaela Herron at Mason Hayes & Curran and Michela Turra at Gianni & Origoni.
FW: Could you provide an overview of polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and microplastics? How prevalent are they in consumer products?
Gallage-Alwis: In recent years, both per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), or ‘forever chemicals’, and microplastics have been mentioned in numerous headlines, first in the US and now in Europe, as being the origin of health and environment concerns. However, both PFAS and microplastics are prevalent in many consumer products. Microplastics are tiny plastic particles less than 5 millimetres in size. They can originate from larger plastic debris that degrades into smaller pieces or be manufactured as small particles. As described by the European Chemical Agency, PFAS are a large class of thousands of synthetic chemicals that are used throughout society. PFAS are found in items that require water, stain or heat resistance, while microplastics are common in products that involve plastic materials or synthetic fibres.
“Toxic tort claims often start inside companies, with employees’ claims or shareholders’ challenges.”
FW: What are the key risks posed by PFAS and microplastics across Europe? Could you outline the potential health effects and environmental impacts associated with their use?
Herron: Research into PFAS is still ongoing, largely because this acronym represents thousands of individual chemical substances. As a result, regulatory measures and legal proceedings are currently at different stages across European Union (EU) member states. For example, the Health Service Executive (HSE), Ireland’s public health and social care service, published an interim position paper as early as 2022 on PFAS in drinking water. This paper highlighted the potential health impacts and the need for regulation. In parallel, the Environmental Protection Agency, a public body responsible for protecting and improving the environment in Ireland, has initiated monitoring for the presence of PFAS in indoor air, dust, drinking water and human milk samples. Since the publication of the HSE’s paper, the recast Drinking Water Directive (EU) 2020/2184 has been transposed into Irish law through the EU (Drinking Water) Regulations 2023. These regulations introduce, effective from 11 January 2026, parametric values and monitoring requirements, including for PFAS, to protect and improve the quality of water intended for human consumption.
Behrendt: When it comes to microplastics, the European Environment Agency states that, “While those chemical compounds are known to be toxic to humans and animals from (eco)toxicological assessments, there is insufficient evidence about their effects as a result of exposure to microplastics” and “there is currently limited understanding regarding what constitutes ‘safe’ levels of microplastics in the environment with respect to human and ecosystem health”.
“Research into PFAS is still ongoing, largely because this acronym represents thousands of individual chemical substances.”
FW: To what extent are regulators taking action to address concerns surrounding PFAS and microplastics? How is this action leading to a rise in litigation?
Turra: There is a proliferation of legislation in the field, both at EU and national level. In Italy, the legislative approach to limit PFAs and microplastics is evolving, also to align with European Directives and to impose stricter standards. In this respect, Legislative Decree No. 18/2023, implementing the Directive (EU) 2020/2184, sets limits of PFAS presence in drinking water that must be met by 12 January 2026. In the same way, Law No. 205/2017 bans PFAs from cosmetics.
Behrendt: in Germany, regulations and projects have been implemented to limit PFAS and microplastics. For example, on 1 August 2023, Germany introduced binding test values for several PFAS – including 0.1 microgrammes per litre for perfluorooctanoic acid, 10 microgrammes per litre for perfluorobutanoic acid and 0.1 microgrammes per litre for perfluorooctane sulfonic acid – to limit their presence in the environment. It also implemented various measures to reduce plastic waste, including bans on certain single-use plastic products and promoting recycling and eco-friendly alternatives.
Gallage-Alwis: In France, numerous legislations have been recently passed against both PFAS and microplastics. The most recent is Law 2025-188 of 27 February 2025 banning PFAS from cosmetics, some textiles and ski wax, with debate over kitchen appliances.
FW: What common legal theories and claims are typically utilised in PFAS and microplastics litigation?
Behrendt: Germany has seen legal actions concerning PFAS contamination, particularly in relation to industrial sites. For example, there have been cases involving chemical companies and their responsibility for PFAS pollution. These cases often focus on the environmental and health impacts of PFAS. For example, waterworks are trying to obtain compensation for groundwater contamination caused by paper sludge composts. We have not seen, as yet, claims brought by individual consumers.
Gallage-Alwis: Numerous civil and criminal complaints have been filed in France, in particular relating to the so-called Chemical Valley located next to Lyon, against companies such as Arkema and Daikin. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are especially active in France but also in the rest of the EU. For instance, on 27 May 2024, the association of NGOs known as Pesticide Action Network Europe revealed the results of a test campaign carried out in the waterways of 10 EU countries, results that will likely be used in future litigation to demonstrate exposure.
Turra: In Italy, one of the earliest and most notable cases involves chemical company Miteni, which is accused of causing PFAS contamination in the Veneto Region. According to the claim, over 350,000 residents would have been exposed to PFAS through tap water, leading to various diseases. The case lies on the outcome of an investigation by the Italian Force of Police. Miteni has been sanctioned with a fine around €3.7m. There are more than 200 plaintiffs, making this one of Europe’s largest PFAS-related lawsuits.
“Germany has seen legal actions concerning PFAS contamination, particularly in relation to industrial sites.”
FW: What advice would you offer to companies with PFAS or microplastics in their products or packaging, in terms of strategies for mitigating legal and financial risks?
Herron: The starting point for mitigating legal and financial risks is to be well-informed about the applicable regulations at member state level and not to assume that everything is handled uniformly at an EU level. Given the significant media attention surrounding PFAS, many member states have implemented specific national regulatory measures. Ensuring regulatory compliance is key. It is also important to document and maintain detailed records of the scientific knowledge and efforts to identify and evaluate potential substitutes.
Turra: It is important to engage with shareholders and train employees, developing their awareness on the topic and in general their engagement. Toxic tort claims often start inside companies, with employees’ claims or shareholders’ challenges.
Gallage-Alwis: Companies should develop PFAS and microplastics management plans, monitor the situation and update these plans on a regular basis to demonstrate what has to be done to control the situation. Finally, they should check their insurance coverage, as these risks are new and may well be excluded from a standard policy.
“Companies should develop PFAS and microplastics management plans, monitor the situation and update these plans.”
FW: What are your predictions for PFAS and microplastics litigation in European over the years ahead? What factors are set to drive future case numbers in this space?
Gallage-Alwis: When it comes to France, we may see claims launched based on anxiety about developing a serious disease in the future. Such anxiety was first compensated in asbestos-related cases and since a decision of the French Supreme Court in 2019, extended to all exposures to ‘dangerous chemicals’. The pool of claimants could then broaden to the entire French population when it comes to PFAS and microplastics.
Herron: Litigation is expected to increase significantly given the increasing scientific evidence and heightened public awareness, as well as a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape. The implementation of new legislation will also have wide-ranging implications for affected stakeholders. These factors, combined with the introduction of a harmonised framework for consumer collective actions under the Representative Actions Directive, are likely to contribute to a rise in litigation concerning alleged harm caused by PFAS. To mitigate potential liability risk exposure, stakeholders should prioritise regulatory compliance and incorporate robust risk management protocols into their product development and supply chain planning.
Behrendt: We are seeing litigation funders seeking to finance PFAS-related litigation. So far, this seems to be focused on scenarios in which water works are claiming damages for very specific contamination. However, I am sure, when these cases are successful, claimants will seek to explore other opportunities as well.
Sylvie Gallage-Alwis is one of the founding partners of the Paris office of Signature Litigation and heads its product liability and industrial risk practice. She is both an avocat à la cour in France and a solicitor in England & Wales. She is specialised in all complex disputes linked to products, namely product liability, product safety, toxic tort, mass litigation/class action, regulatory compliance and environment/climate change. She is involved in several pending high-profile French industrial disaster cases. He/She can be contacted on +33 (0)1 7075 5800 or by email: sylvie.gallage-alwis@signaturelitigation.com.
Philipp Behrendt heads up the German disputes & investigations group at Taylor Wessing and is joint head of the international group. He conducts complex proceedings before state courts in Germany and national and international arbitration tribunals. In addition, he advises clients on international litigation, primarily in the US. A focus of his practice is product liability and product safety law, in which he advises on the marketability of products, recalls, defence against claims and all other related aspects. He can be contacted on +49 40 36803 0 or by email: p.behrendt@taylorwessing.com.
Michaela Herron is head of the product regulatory team and head of life sciences at Mason Hayes & Curran. She advises life sciences, technology, cosmetic and consumer product clients on the regulatory framework applicable to their products and services throughout their lifecycle. She frequently advises clients on regulatory investigations by enforcement authorities. She has also overseen the implementation and coordination of high volume product withdrawals and product recalls, including rectification strategies, in multiple jurisdictions. She can be contacted on +353 86 607 6005 or by email: mherron@mhc.ie.
Michela Turra has been a counsel in Gianni & Origoni’s litigation & arbitration department since 2007. She has gained solid experience in litigation, with specific focus on civil (product liability, tort liability, liability arising from dangerous activities) and international actions. After graduating in law, summa cum laude, from the Catholic University in Milan in 2003, she joined the litigation & dispute resolution department of a leading international law firm. She can be contacted on +39 02 763741 or by email: mturra@gop.it.
© Financier Worldwide
THE PANELLISTS
Signature Litigation
Taylor Wessing
Mason Hayes & Curran
Gianni & Origoni
International dispute resolution
Choosing a forum for international commercial disputes: litigation, arbitration or mediation?
Factors to consider when mapping objectives and tactics in dispute resolution
Confidentiality of the arbitration process: myth or reality?
The UK Arbitration Act 2025: key changes and summary disposal
Rising risks: navigating the growing landscape of AI litigation in the UK