![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
Abstract
This article reviews Guillaume Laganière’s Liability for Transboundary Pollution at the Intersection of Public and Private International Law (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2022). This book makes a valuable contribution to private international law scholarship by exploring the relationship between public and private international law and the regulatory function of private international law in relation to transboundary pollution. The book’s focus on transboundary pollution, however, is narrow. A comprehensive and nuanced regulatory response to contemporary environmental challenges in private international law must also address cases where transnational corporations and global value chains are sued in their home states for environmental damage caused in developing states.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 Case 21/76 Handelskwekerij GJ Bier BV v Mines de potasse d’Alsace SA [1976] ECR 1735.
2 Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II) [2007] OJ L199/40.
3 H Muir Watt, “Private International Law Beyond the Schism” (2011) 2 Transnational Legal Theory 347, 425, fn 377.
4 U Grušić, “International Environmental Litigation in EU Courts: A Regulatory Perspective” (2016) 35 Yearbook of European Law 180.
5 R Michaels, V Ruiz Abou-Nigm and H van Loon (eds), The Private Side of Transforming our World – UN Sustainable Development Goals 2030 and the Role of Private International Law (lntersentia, 2021).
6 European Group of Private International Law (GEDIP), “Recommendation to the European Commission Concerning the Private International Law Aspects of the Future Instrument of the European Union on Corporate Due Diligence and Corporate Accountability of 8 October 2021” https://gedip-egpil.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Recommandation-GEDIP-Recommendation-EGPIL-final-1.pdf accessed on 20 November 2023; “Recommendation Concerning the Proposal for a Directive of 23 February 2022 on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, Following Up on Its Recommendation to the Commission of 8 October 2021” https://gedip-egpil.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Recommendation-GEDIP2022E.pdf accessed on 20 November 2023.
7 ILA, “Resolution No 6/2006: Transnational Enforcement of Environmental Law” in ILA, “Report of the Seventy-Second Conference” (Toronto 2006), Rules 4 and 5; UNEP, “Guidelines for the Development of Domestic Legislation on Liability, Response Action and Compensation for Damage Caused by Activities Dangerous to the Environment” in Governing Council of UNEP, “Proceedings of the Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum at its Eleventh Special Session (24-26 February 2010)” (2010) UN doc UNEP/GCSS.XI/11, Guideline 13.
8 Laganière 8.
9 Ibid, 9-10.
10 Ibid, 2, referring to Trail Smelter (US v Canada) (1941) 3 RIAA 1905. See also Laganière 13-14.
11 Laganière 60.
12 Principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities, annexed to GA Res 61/36 (4 December 2006) UN Doc A/RES/61/36.
13 Laganière particularly engages with the work of R Wai. See R Wai, “Transnational Liftoff and Juridical Touchdown: The Regulatory Function of Private International Law in an Era of Globalization” (2002) 40 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 209.
14 Supra n 12.
15 Supra n 7.
16 Ibid.
17 British South Africa Co v Companhia de Moçambique [1893] AC 602 (HL).
18 This approach is also adopted in some non-EU states: Albania, Dominican Republic, Macedonia, Montenegro, Norway (as well as Denmark (which is not bound by Rome II) under the Nordic Convention of 19 February 1974 on the Protection of the Environment), the UK, and the 2012 draft Serbian private international law act: SC Symeonides, Codifying Choice of Law Around the World: An International Comparative Analysis (OUP, 2014) 62-64; SC Symeonides, “Private International Law: Idealism, Pragmatism, Eclecticism” (2017) 384 Recueil des Cours 9, 240-241; T Deskoski, "Macedonia, FYR" in Encyclopedia of Private International Law (2017) 2315, 2322; Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations and Non-Contractual Obligations (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (SI 2019/834).
19 Institute of International Law, “The Activities of National Judges and the International Relations of Their State” (Milan 1993) https://www.idi-iil.org/app/uploads/2017/06/1993_mil_01_en.pdf accessed on 20 November 2023; B Conforti, International Law and the Role of Domestic Legal Systems (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1993); A Nollkaemper, National Courts and the International Rule of Law (OUP, 2011); A Nollkaemper and others (eds), International Law in Domestic Courts: A Casebook (OUP, 2018).
20 N Sachs, “Beyond the Liability Wall: Strengthening Tort Remedies in International Environmental Law” (2008) 55 UCLA Law Review 837.
21 D Shelton, Remedies in International Human Rights Law (OUP, 3rd edn, 2015) ch 4; E Bagińska (ed), Damages for Violations of Human Rights: A Comparative Study of Domestic Legal Systems (Springer, 2016).
22 See the UN Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework and its implementing Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which do not address private international law, conflict of laws, or choice of law: UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework” (UN, 2011).
23 A Mills, The Confluence of Public and Private International Law: Justice, Pluralism and Subsidiarity in International Constitutional Ordering of Private Law (CUP, 2009); V Ruiz Abou-Nigm, K McCall-Smith and D French (eds), Linkages and Boundaries in Private and Public International Law (Hart Publishing, 2018).
24 JJ Fawcett, M Ní Shúilleabháin and S Shah, Human Rights and Private International Law (OUP, 2016).
25 FJ Zamora Cabot, L Heckendorn Urscheler and S De Dycker (eds), Implementing the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Private International Law Perspectives (Schulthess, 2017); C Kessedjian and H Cantú Rivera (eds), Private International Law Aspects of Corporate Social Responsibility (Springer, 2020); V Rouas, Achieving Access to Justice in a Business and Human Rights Context: An Assessment of Litigation and Regulatory Responses in European Civil-Law Countries (IALS, 2022).
26 MM Karayanni, Conflicts in a Conflict: A Conflict of Laws Case Study on Israel and the Palestinian Territories (OUP, 2014); U Grušić, Torts in UK Foreign Relations (OUP, 2023).
27 Laganière 214.
28 Ibid.
29 D Augenstein and D Kinley, “When Human Rights ‘Responsibilities’ Become ‘Duties’: The Extra-territorial Obligations of States that Bind Corporations”, in S Deva and D Bilchitz (eds), Human Rights Obligations of Business: Beyond the Corporate Responsibility to Respect? (CUP, 2013).
30 The latest, third revised draft is available at https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/wg-trans-corp/igwg-on-tnc accessed on 20 November 2023.
31 “Draft Report of 11 September 2020 with Recommendations to the Commission on Corporate Due Diligence and Corporate Accountability (2020/2129(INL))”.
32 B Grama and others, “Third Revised Draft Treaty on Business and Human Rights: Comments and Recommendations” (TMC Asser Institute Centre for International & European Law, Policy Brief 2021-01, October 2021). EU bodies have rejected the European Parliament Committee on Legal Affairs proposal: European Parliament, “Resolution of 10 March 2021 with Recommendations to the Commission on Corporate Due Diligence and Corporate Accountability (2020/2129(INL))” [2021] OJ C474/11; European Commission, “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and Amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937” COM (2022) 71 final; European Parliament amendments of 1 June 2023 on the Commission’s proposed directive P9_TA(2023)0209.
33 For example, the rule of special jurisdiction at the place of damage is unconstitutional in the US if the defendant does not have minimum contacts with the forum: World-Wide Volkswagen Corp v Woodson 444 U.S. 286 (1980); Asahi Metal Industry Co v Superior Court 480 U.S. 102 (1987); J McIntyre Machinery Ltd v Nicastro 564 U.S. 873 (2011).
34 M Lehmann, “Regulation, Global Governance and Private International Law: Squaring the Triangle” (2020) 16 Journal of Private International Law 1.
35 Laganière 149.
36 Ibid, 180-181.
37 A Briggs, “A Note on the Application of the Statute Law of Singapore within its Private International Law” [2005] Singapore Journal of Legal Studies 189, 190.
38 Gillespie Management Corp v Terrace Properties (1989) 62 DLR (4th) 221 (BC CA).
39 Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) [2008] OJ L177/6. See L Collins and J Harris (eds), Dicey, Morris and Collins on the Conflict of Laws (Sweet and Maxwell, 16th edn, 2022), paras 32-248-32-250.
40 Supra n 1.
41 C Bernasconi, “Civil Liability Resulting from Transfrontier Environmental Damage: A Case for the Hague Conference?” (1999) 12 Hague Yearbook of International Law 35, focusing on “transfrontier” pollution that assumes that the places of wrongful conduct and injury are in different countries.
42 Laganière 10.
43 Ibid, 17.
44 Ibid, 8.
45 Ibid, 164.
46 Aguinda v Texaco Inc 303 F 3d 470 (2d Cir 2002); Jota v Texaco Inc 157 F 3d 153 (2d Cir 1998).
47 Supra n 6.
48 Laganière 9.
49 Ibid, 12.
50 H van Loon, “Principles and Building Blocks for a Global Legal Framework for Transnational Civil Litigation in Environmental Matters” (2018) 23 Uniform Law Review 298, 316. Similarly, Y Nishitani, “Localisation of Damage in Private International Law and Challenges of Climate Change Litigation” (2022) 6 International Business Law Journal 707, 716–717.
51 M Lehmann and F Eichel, “Globaler Klimawandel und Internationales Privatrecht: Zuständigkeit und anzuwendendes Recht für transnationale Klagen wegen klimawandelbedingter Individualschäden” (2019) 83 RabelZ 77, 110.
52 Laganière 132.
53 Ibid, 178-179.
54 Ibid, 179.
55 (7 February 2018, Higher Regional Court Hamm).