abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Diese Seite ist nicht auf Deutsch verfügbar und wird angezeigt auf English


1 Mai 2011

American Federation of Labor – Congress of Industrial Organizations, Batirente, Boston Common Asset Management, Catholic Health Partners, Catholic Healthcare West, Christopher Reynolds Foundation, International Brotherhood of Teamsters General Fund, Laidlaw Foundation, Mercy Investment Service, Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate, New York State Office of the Comptroller, Oneida Trust Oxfam America, Pinnacle Investment Advisors, School Sisters of Notre Dame Cooperative Investment Fund, Sisters of Notre Dame of Toledo, Sisters of St. Joseph of Springfield, Spring Water Asset Management, Trillium Asset Management Corporation, Unitarian Universalist Association, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Zevin Asset Management

[PDF] Investor statement on Chevron and Aguinda v. Texaco

We urge Chevron to use the Aguinda v. Texaco verdict earlier this year to take a fresh look at its options to address Texaco’s legacy in the Ecuadorian rainforest. In February 2011, the Ecuadorian Provincial Court found Chevron liable for $18 billion in compensatory and punitive damages for polluting vast areas of the Amazonian rainforest from oil drilling and its waste products...We...call upon the Company to reevaluate whether endless litigation in the Aguinda case is the best strategy for the Company and its shareholders, or whether a more productive approach, such as reaching an equitable negotiated settlement, could be employed to protect shareholder investments and prevent any further reputational harm due to protracted litigation.