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


10 Mai 2017

Andrew Kalamut, Mining Prospects (Canada)

Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation – The Enforcement Saga Continues

In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada in Chevron Corp. v. Yaiguaje...determined that Ontario courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate a recognition and enforcement action against an Ontario affiliate of a foreign corporation...[T]he enforcement action was brought by Ecuadorian plaintiffs against Chevron Corporation...and its...subsidiary, Chevron Canada Limited (“Chevron Canada”)...Chevron Canada sought summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ enforcement action as against it on the basis that it was not a party to the Ecuadorian proceeding, it is not a judgment-debtor under the Ecuadorian judgment, no wrongdoing is alleged against Chevron Canada in the plaintiffs’ enforce action, and that Chevron Canada is a separate legal entity with no basis on which to pierce Chevron Canada’s corporate veil...[T]he plaintiffs argued that Chevron Canada is an asset of Chevron, and alternatively...the court should pierce Chevron Canada’s corporate veil because Chevron has total, effective control over Chevron...The court rejected that position...The court ultimately determined that the principle of corporate separateness applies in the context of groups of companies...and that groups of companies are not to be regarded as one single entity...The plaintiffs’ have appealed the decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal.