Britain’s largest defence contractor, BAE Systems, is facing a £120m lawsuit after withdrawing support for aircraft used to deliver humanitarian aid across parts of Africa, a move that a cargo operator says has disrupted critical relief missions.
The claim has been brought by EnComm Aviation, which alleges that the decision forced it to cancel major aid contracts and reduced supplies to regions including South Sudan, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The case has been filed before the UK high court.
At the centre of the dispute is BAE Systems’ decision to withdraw support for its Advanced Turbo-Prop aircraft, commonly known as ATP, which EnComm operated for humanitarian missions.
EnComm alleges that this action constituted a breach of duty of care, arguing that the withdrawal effectively grounded its fleet by impacting the aircraft’s airworthiness status.
In filings cited by The Guardian, the company claims that the decision rendered its aircraft “of no real value beyond scrap”, forming the basis of its £120m damages claim.
A spokesperson for BAE Systems told the publication that the company does not comment on ongoing litigation.
EnComm’s ATP aircraft had been deployed extensively in regions with limited infrastructure, where their ability to operate on short and unpaved airstrips made them particularly suited for humanitarian logistics.
Operational impact highlighted by EnComm:
Following the withdrawal of support, EnComm cancelled several humanitarian contracts, including a United Nations programme to supply aid to 12 destinations in Somalia, where 6.5 million people are facing acute food insecurity, according to The Guardian.
EnComm Aviation’s director, Jackton Obuola, said the consequences extended beyond commercial losses.
“BAE’s pursuit of profit has cut off humanitarian aid for those most in need, destroying lives and our business in the process,” he told The Guardian.
Obuola described the surrender of certification affecting the ATP aircraft as “virtually unprecedented in aviation history”, particularly at a time when global humanitarian assistance is under strain.
According to the report, EnComm’s legal team has pointed to prior communications with BAE Systems’ senior leadership. These included emails and meetings that allegedly led the operator to expect continued support for the ATP platform for at least five years.
The claim argues that these assurances influenced EnComm’s operational and commercial decisions, making the subsequent withdrawal materially damaging.
“In order to get answers we have been forced to bring this claim and hear BAE’s explanation in court,” Obuola said, as quoted by The Guardian.
The lawsuit comes at a time when BAE Systems is reporting strong financial performance. The company recently announced record annual sales exceeding £30bn, driven by rising global defence spending amid geopolitical tensions.
The contrast between robust defence revenues and the legal challenge linked to humanitarian logistics underscores the complex operating environment for large defence contractors, particularly where commercial, regulatory and ethical considerations intersect.
The case is expected to test the extent of responsibility manufacturers hold over long-term support for legacy aircraft platforms, particularly those repurposed for humanitarian use.
For aid operators, the outcome could have wider implications for fleet planning and contractual safeguards when relying on ageing aircraft systems.
As proceedings move forward in the UK high court, the dispute also draws attention to the fragility of humanitarian supply chains, where technical decisions in the aviation ecosystem can have immediate consequences on aid delivery in crisis-hit regions.
Join the conversation
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts!
Sign In to Comment