One of the world’s largest oil companies will admit at a court hearing today that Britain’s biggest peacetime explosion was the result of negligence.

In a statement to The Times, Total UK confirmed that it had advised claimants against it and Hertfordshire Oil Storage Limited (HOSL), a joint venture with Chevron, that the duty supervisor at the time was responsible for the huge blast at the Buncefield oil depot in Hertfordshire in December 2005.

The admission marks a dramatic turnaround as the oil giants prepare to fight claims worth almost £1 billion brought by insurance companies, small businesses and about 280 families whose properties were damaged or destroyed by the blast.

Although Total UK will admit that the incident was due to negligence, it intends to argue that it should not be liable for damages because it could not reasonably have been foreseen that it would cause the damage it did.

Therefore, the company said that it was not admitting civil or criminal liability and would continue to fight the case, set to go to trial in October. A spokesman for Chevron, which owns 40 per cent of HOSL, said that it would not admit negligence and declined to comment further.

The fire began at an HOSL facility within the Buncefield compound at 6am on December 11, 2005. Forty-three people were injured. A report in 2006 by an independent investigation board did not apportion blame, but found that human error and faulty safety equipment were responsible.

Lawyers close to the case said that the oil companies and HOSL had until now been defending themselves on two fronts, refusing to admit that the blast was the result of negligence. The lawyers said that the admission of negligence was likely to be a tactical ploy to shift the emphasis of the proceedings away from the issue of negligence.

The defendants are understood to have retained the services of the commercial barristers Lord Grabiner, QC, Gordon Pollock, QC, and Jonathan Sumption, QC. The trial will determine which company was liable. A separate hearing would be required to assess damages.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• UK legal industry faces loss of 10,000 lawyers
• Curious case of chocolate bunny trademark
• Divorce settlement granted after 22 years