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

Эта страница недоступна на Русский и отображается на English

Статья

1 Авг 2012

Автор:
Kathleen Sullivan, counsel for respondents - Quinn Emmanuel Urquhart & Sullivan

[PDF] Esther Kiobel, et al. v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, et al. - Supplemental Brief for Respondents

Petitioners’ complaint alleges that the Nigerian government, aided and abetted by an Anglo-Dutch company, subjected Nigerian citizens to human-rights violations on Nigerian soil. Few cases could be more remote from the circumstances that prompted the First Congress to enact the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (“ATS”): namely, the prospect that international-law violations committed on U.S. soil might prompt international conflict and even war if left without a remedy in the nascent federal courts. Nothing in the ATS’s text, structure, or history contemplates extending it to a case like this one, and, to the contrary, two well-established canons of con-struction foreclose that extension.

Part of the following timelines

Shell files supplemental brief with US Supreme Court for rehearing of Kiobel v. Shell Alien Tort Claims Act case

Описание дела: Судебные дела против Shell (отн. Нигерии, Kiobel v Shell, в США)