|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
. | ![]() |
. |
|
![]() |
![]() by Staff Writers Ottawa (AFP) Sept 4, 2015
Ecuadoran villagers can seek to enforce in Canada a multibillion-dollar Ecuadoran judgment against US oil giant Chevron on pollution in the Amazon rainforest, Canada's top court said Friday. However, the decision only establishes jurisdiction and does not settle the claim itself. Chevron's Canadian subsidiary dismissed the ruling, calling the Ecuadoran judgment fraudulent and unenforceable. But a lawyer for the villagers vowed to go after Chevron's Canadian assets, which he said were worth $15 billion. "We are going to pursue Chevron's assets in Canada and in the pertinent courts, until the last cent of the award is paid," Pablo Fajardo said at a news conference in Quito. In Canada, and in parallel legal fights in the United States and Brazil, the indigenous people of Ecuador's Lago Agrio region have sought to collect compensation for the mass dumping of oilfield waste between the 1970s and 1990s, after an Ecuadoran court ordered Chevron to pay $9.5 billion in damages. The environmental destruction was allegedly committed by Texaco, which Chevron bought in 2001. The villagers had asked the Ontario Superior Court to force Chevron to hand over Can$12 billion (US$11.3 billion) in Canadian assets held by subsidiaries. The court turned them down, but they won on appeal. The oil company has refused to pay, alleging fraud and bribery was used to obtain the ruling in Ecuador and maintains that its Canadian subsidiaries are wholly independent and have nothing to do with the case. In March 2014, a US court ruled that the Ecuadoran judgment was the product of "fraud and racketeering" and was unenforceable in the United States. In its decision Friday, the Canadian Supreme Court said "Chevron Canada has a physical office in Ontario, where it was served. "Its business activities at this office are sustained; it has representatives who provide services to customers in the province. Canadian courts have found that jurisdiction exists in such circumstances." But it added that "a finding of jurisdiction does nothing more than afford the plaintiffs the opportunity to seek recognition and enforcement of the Ecuadoran judgment." Thousands of villagers in the polluted area say they were sickened and that many have cancer from the contamination of their water supply from the oil spillage. Chevron contends that Texaco paid all of the required clean-up costs before leaving the country in the 1990s. In a statement, its Canadian subsidiary said the latest ruling "has no bearing on the legitimacy or enforceability of the fraudulent Ecuadoran judgment." "The facts remain, as Chevron Corp. established in the United States, that the Ecuadoran judgment is the product of fraud and other misconduct, and is therefore illegitimate and unenforceable," it said.
Related Links All About Oil and Gas News at OilGasDaily.com
|
![]() |
|
The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2014 - Space Media Network. All websites are published in Australia and are solely subject to Australian law and governed by Fair Use principals for news reporting and research purposes. AFP, UPI and IANS news wire stories are copyright Agence France-Presse, United Press International and Indo-Asia News Service. ESA news reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by Space Media Network on any Web page published or hosted by Space Media Network. Privacy Statement All images and articles appearing on Space Media Network have been edited or digitally altered in some way. Any requests to remove copyright material will be acted upon in a timely and appropriate manner. Any attempt to extort money from Space Media Network will be ignored and reported to Australian Law Enforcement Agencies as a potential case of financial fraud involving the use of a telephonic carriage device or postal service. |