abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapelocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewprofilerefreshnewssearchsecurityPathtagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Esta página no está disponsible en español y se muestra enEnglish

Artículo

Canadian Multinationals and Alien Torts

It was long argued by corporations and foreign governments that the application of the ATCA…gave jurisdiction to the American courts over non-American companies in foreign countries…[T]he broad interpretation of the ATCA was narrowed in the 2009 case of The Presbyterian Church of Sudan v. Talisman Energy Inc…[The] company which was accused of aiding and abetting the Sudanese government in the forced movement and genocide of civilians residing near oil facilities. [T]he Court of Appeals…imposed a higher pleading standard…a multinational… corporation… could not be liable without actual intent to commit...The decision was appealed to the Supreme Court…, but the Supreme Court declined to address the issue…For now, the Talisman ruling has removed what had been an effective weapon for human rights groups to force changes in the behaviour of multinational corporations. [also refers to Unocal (part of Chevron), Shell, Coca-Cola, Dow, Rio Tinto]

Part of the following stories

Perfil de demanda judicial contra Coca-Cola por actividades en Colombia

Talisman lawsuit (re Sudan)

Unocal lawsuit (re Myanmar)