Where can victims of human rights violations caused by transnational corporations (TNCs) sue the corporations for damages? This Note examines the current options of suing in (1) the host state, where the alleged violations occurred, (2) the home state, where the parent company of the TNC is domiciled, and (3) a third-party state, and argues that suing in the home state is the most viable option in future litigation. To litigate in the home state (a parent company’s domicile), plaintiffs need to overcome the barriers posed by the doctrine of separate legal personality of the parent and the subsidiary. This Note examines the four legal theories under which a parent company may be held liable for an overseas subsidiary’s wrongful activities.

Recognizing the need to, among other things, provide adequate forums for victims of corporate human rights abuses to seek remedies, the United Nations started the drafting process of a binding treaty aimed to increase access to effective remedies for victims of corporate abuses and ensure accountability for such abuses. This Note explores how the draft treaty, specifically the Third Revised Draft, addresses the question of parent-subsidiary liability. This Note further argues that the relevant provision that addresses transnational corporate liability contains legal uncertainty that may pose immense hardship for victims to obtain remedy and allow disparity in how domestic court systems address the problem of transnational liability. Finally, this Note proposes revisions to the binding treaty in draft to address its shortcomings, clarify the legal theories recognized under the treaty, and incorporate a quasi-strict liability regime.

Continue Reading “Human Rights Litigation Against Transnational Corporations in Their Home States: A Proposed Revision of the Business and Human Rights“