The U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights pointed out that businesses should undertake human rights protection obligations, which often needs to be carried out by the way of civil liability. This paper will take the judicial practice of the U.K. and the Netherlands as examples to reveal the legitimacy of the parent company's duty of care to its subsidiaries under the premise of not applying the system of “piercing the corporate veil” from the perspective of comparative law. The duty of care not only refers to the relevant obligation of parent company and its subsidiary, but also means the same thing of companies in the whole supply chain, the phenomenon reflects a trend that the subjects of duty of care has expanded. On this basis, Article 1165 in the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China could be reinterpreted, demonstrating justificatory basis of the enterprise's duty of care.
Read full abstract