Civil Litigation and Transnational Business: An Alien Tort Statute Primer

Capital, Corporate Citizenship and Legitimacy: The Ideological Force of ‘Corporate Crime’ in International Law

“…Civil society actors have, for instance, persuaded public prosecutors to investigate alleged corporate crimes in international law in The Netherlands (Riwal, 2010;and Trafigura, 2011;Business & Human Rights: Trafigura lawsuits). The much-talked about ATS cases (mentioned as examples of 'weaponised CSR' above) in the US courts where civil compensation claims are based on one or more violations of international law, including those amounting to international crimes, are likewise reactions to perceived failures of CSR (Shamir, 2004;Thompson et al, 2009;Gallagher, 2010;Baars, 2007;Stewart, 2014). Both domestic civil and criminal cases are, however, normally dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and other 'technicalities'.…”

Secondary Stakeholders as Agents of Influence: Three Essays on Political Risk, Reputation and Multinational Performance

“…Whether the emerging threat of transnational legal activism represents a type of political or social risk is the question to which we now turn our attention, following a brief survey of the NGOs that have pioneered this new form of contestation and their legal tool of choice -the ATS. (Davis, 2008;Gallagher, 2010).…”

“…While the case was initially dismissed by a U.S. district court on jurisdictional grounds, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the decision, ruling that torture and extra-judicial killing constitute violations of the "law of nations" and are thus actionable under ATS. The judge awarded the plaintiffs $10 million in punitive damages, stimulating new interest in the law as a vehicle for prosecuting crimes against humanity committed on foreign soil (Davis, 2008;Gallagher, 2010 against civilians as part of a $1.2 billion natural gas pipeline project in which the company had a minority stake (Holzmeyer, 2009;Schoen, Falchek, & Hogan, 2005).…”

“…Unlike previous ATS cases involving corporate defendants, this one survived motions to dismiss, suggesting that U.S. courts viewed the American legal system as the appropriate forum for claims involving serious rights abuses committed by foreign governments and militaries, and the theories of "vicarious corporate liability" upon which these claims rested (Davis, 2008;Shamir, 2004 (Gallagher, 2010).…”

“…Moreover, litigation-based campaigns require broader and denser support networks than do other types of stakeholder campaigns, particularly those involving allegations of overseas crimes, since attorneys must often rely on intermediaries to gain access to local communities to gather evidence (Davis, 2008;Risse, Ropp, & Sikkink, 1999). Finally, since successful legal campaigns require significant resource commitments over extended periods of time, plaintiffs hoping to prevail must consider the resources their prospective target might be able to marshal to defeat the challenge -a strategic calculation that stakeholder groups employing alternative tactics like boycotts or protests may not need to make (Holzmeyer, 2009 Since a landmark 1996 case against Unocal for alleged complicity in human rights violations committed by the Burmese military in furtherance of a $1.2 billion natural gas pipeline project, 43 the ATS has been used to sue some of the world's largest MNEs, including Citigroup, Dow Chemical, General Motors, Exxon Mobil, Chiquita, Bridgestone, Coca-Cola, IBM, and Wal-Mart (Gallagher, 2010).…”