Abstract

Two English and two Dutch cases have recently clarified the (potential) liability of parent companies vis-à-vis third parties in relation to damage caused by their subsidiaries. They concern the decisions of the UK Supreme Court in Vedanta v Lungowe and Okpabi v Shell, the Hague Court of Appeal in Oguru v Shell and the Hague District Court in Milieudefensie v Shell (climate change case).

Highlights

  • In early 2021, the Hague Court of Appeal in Oguru and the UK Supreme Court in Okpabi confirmed that parent companies[1] may owe a duty of care as regards the operational activities of their subsidiaries

  • This mine was operated by Konkola Copper Mines (KCM), a subsidiary of Vedanta, a parent company incorporated in the United Kingdom

  • In light of other evidence available to the Supreme Court, including documents the Hague Court of Appeal had ordered Shell to disclose, it concluded that the alleged facts had not been shown to be demonstrably untrue or unsupportable and that there were real issues to be answered in a trial.[42]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

If claimants litigate against a multinational’s subsidiary in their own country, a fair trial may be doubtful, if the judiciary is not independent or incapable of handling mass claims, or because the local legal profession cannot match the multinational’s legal power. Claimants prefer to litigate in the parent company’s jurisdiction. This brings the dispute to the heart of the group, generating media publicity and reputational damage. Under EU law, parent companies can be summoned before the court of their seat or head office.[50] The forum non conveniens-defence is not accepted.[51] Whether the court has jurisdiction over claims against non-EU subsidiaries is determined by national law. 51 ECJ, 1 March 2005, Owusu, C-281/02, ECR [2005] I-01383 (Owusu/Jackson)

The broader context
Existing and future legislation
Transnational character of business and human rights
Vedanta in London
Facts and interlocutory decisions
Final decision: overview
Final decision: cause of leaks
Final decision: response to leaks
Final decision: remediation of soil and ponds
The sequel
Okpabi in London
Milieudefensie in The Hague
England
Netherlands
Applicable procedural law
Applicable substantive law
Comparison of English and continental forums
Authority of parents over their subsidiaries
A parent’s duty of care is nothing special
Potential duties of care of parent companies under English law
Does Vedanta go too far or not far enough?
Vedanta misunderstood in Oguru
Liability of former parents for cause of oil leaks
Lessons from the case law
The reasonably acting parent company
Beyond compliance: leadership from the top
Whose risks are we talking about?
Damage versus violating human rights
Compensation versus human rights remedy
Findings
10. Concluding observations
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.