hide message

Welcome to the Resource Centre

We make it our mission to work with advocates in civil society, business and government to address inequalities of power, seek remedy for abuse, and ensure protection of people and planet.

Both companies and impacted communities thank us for the resources and support we provide.

This is only possible because of your support. Please make a donation today.

Thank you,
Phil Bloomer, Executive Director

Donate now hide message

Overview of non-US tort litigation against multinational companies for human rights abuses, by Richard Meeran of Leigh Day & Co

Get RSS feed of these results

All components of this story

Article
11 March 2011

The future of Alien Tort Statute litigation: a talk by Paul Hoffman

Author: Jill Greenfield, Harvard Law School

In a…talk…[at]…Harvard Law School Paul Hoffman, a leading litigator of claims brought under the Alien Tort Statute, offered a look at the history of lawsuits against corporations for their complicity in human rights violations—and a glimpse of some possible future developments…Hoffman provided background on how the Statute has been used to bring human rights violators to justice over the past three decades... But the question of whether the Alien Tort Statute can apply to corporations remains open...[E]ven if Kiobel is upheld on appeal, there are other avenues that human rights litigators can pursue in pushing for corporate accountability for human rights violations. One option would be to sue CEOs and other responsible individuals within the corporation for their involvement in human rights cases…Recognizing the limits of U.S. lawyers bringing suit against U.S. corporations in district courts, Hoffman said that ultimate goal is to inspire international regulation of corporate conduct in order to enforce good corporate behavior.

Read the full post here

Article
+ Español - Hide

Author: Richard Meeran, Leigh Day & Co

La Ley estadounidense de reparación de agravios a ciudadanos extranjeros (Alien Tort Statute o ATS, por sus siglas en inglés) es una ley interna que otorga a los tribunales estadounidenses competencias en casos que denuncian violaciones de los derechos humanos en el ámbito internacional. Durante los diez últimos años, se ha considerado que esta ley era el mecanismo que ofrecía el potencial más prometedor para exigir responsabilidades a las multinacionales por las violaciones de los derechos humanos en los países en desarrollo…Sin embargo, en septiembre de 2009 los Tribunales de Apelación del Segundo Circuito de Estados Unidos (US Second Circuit Courts of Appeals)…sostuvo que el derecho internacional consuetudinario en materia de derechos humanos no reconoce la responsabilidad civil de las personas jurídicas privadas, por lo que no se puede exigir responsabilidad alguna a las multinacionales en virtud de la ATS…Es posible que esta cuestión acabe resolviéndose en el Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court)…Por consiguiente, parece que ha llegado el momento de considerar la situación por lo que respecta al desarrollo continuo de reparaciones de agravios más convencionales. Este tipo de acciones ha obtenido resultados excelentes durante, más o menos, los diez últimos años. [se refiere a Anglo American, Anvil Mining, BHP Billiton, BP, Cambior, Cape plc, Chevron, Gencor, Merck, Minera Majaz (part of Monterrico Metals), Monterrico Metals (part of Zijin), Rio Blanco (part of Monterrico Metals), Rio Tinto, Securitas, Shell, Thor Chemicals, Unocal (part of Chevron), Zijin]

Read the full post here

Article
6 March 2011

[PDF] Tort litigation against multinationals (“MNCs”) for violation of human rights: an overview of the position outside the US

Author: Richard Meeran, Leigh Day & Co

Over the past decade, the US Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”)…has generally been viewed as the mechanism with the most promising potential for holding MNCs to account for human rights violations in developing countries. In recent years, US public interest lawyers have been at the forefront of developing ATS cases where MNCs are alleged to have been complicit with states in such violations…However a majority decision of the US Second Circuit Courts of Appeals in September 2010…held that customary international human rights law does not recognise the liability of corporations, and consequently that MNCs cannot be liable under “ATS”…This issue may well be finally resolved by the Supreme Court…Consequently, at this point in time it would seem timely to consider the state of play with regard to the continued development of more conventional tort law remedies. These too have yielded considerable success over the past decade or so. [refers to Anglo American, Anvil Mining, BHP Billiton, BP, Cambior, Cape plc, Chevron, Gencor, Merck, Minera Majaz (part of Monterrico Metals), Monterrico Metals (part of Zijin), Rio Blanco (part of Monterrico Metals), Rio Tinto, Securitas, Shell, Thor Chemicals, Unocal (part of Chevron), Zijin]

Read the full post here