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

The content is also available in the following languages: 简体中文, 繁體中文


18 May 2011

China Construction Bank lawsuit

In 2009, a former employee filed a lawsuit in US court against China Construction Bank Corporation, alleging the corporation was responsible for the torture, beatings, sexual abuse, and prolonged arbitrary detention that he suffered at the hands of the Chinese police. In 2010, the Court dismissed the complaint finding the evidence presented was not sufficient to prove the allegations. 



In October 2009 Liu Bo Shan filed a lawsuit in US Federal court in New York against his former employer, China Construction Bank Corporation.  He claimed that the bank was responsible for torture, beatings, sexual abuse and prolonged arbitrary detention that he suffered at the hands of Chinese police.  Mr. Liu had been an employee of the bank from 1988 to 1993.  During this time, he was assigned to audit certain loan discrepancies, and his audit uncovered that the bank had issued false bank deposit certificates.  Following Mr. Liu’s audit report, the bank terminated his employment.  Mr. Liu alleges that the bank subsequently fabricated charges against him, accusing him of consorting with a prostitute on bank property, and had Mr Liu arrested.  After Mr. Liu’s arrest, he was tortured, beaten and sexually abused by the police.

In March 2010 China Construction Bank moved to dismiss Mr. Liu’s claims.  On 28 June 2010, the court granted the bank’s motion to dismiss.  The court found that the facts Mr. Liu alleged in his complaint were not sufficient, even if they could have been proven, to establish the bank’s responsibility for the abuses he suffered.  On 5 May 2011 the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the case. 

- “A Second Circuit Panel Follows Kiobel, Dismisses ATS Claim”, Russell Jackson, Consumer Class Actions & Mass Torts, 10 May 2011
- “China’s banks face overseas pitfalls”, Jamil Anderlini, Financial Times, 19 Nov 2009
- “Asylee Says Chinese Bank Had Him Tortured”, Adam Klasfeld, Courthouse News Service, 12 Oct 2009

- US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: [PDF] Liu Bo Shan v China Construction Bank Corporation - Summary Order [affirming lower court’s dismissal], 5 May 2011
- US District Court for the Southern District of New York: Liu Bo Shan v China Construction Bank Corp. - Opinion & Order [dismissing the case], 28 Jun 2010