In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: chevron

04 Aug

tape. So reviewing it does not give you the complete picture. Chevron and the filmmaker Joe Berlinger have refused to provide the plaintiffs a copy of the tapes, as had the court. As a result, we do not have a way to review the original tape. Randy Mastro’s comment that Cabrera never offered Chevron the opportunity to meet is absolutely incorrect. Chevron chose not to cooperate with Cabrera. Chevron did not submit any information to Cabrera for inclusion into his report. Why? Because the vast majority of the samples taken...
04.08.10 | |

27 Mar

2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States told ChevronTexaco (Chevron's name at that time) that the only way the court would agree to dismiss the original lawsuit filed in the U.S. is if ChevronTexaco would accept Ecuadorian jurisdiction. ChevronTexaco agreed. Last year in a related matter the 2nd Circuit made it crystal clear that Chevron was indeed liable for Texaco's actions in Ecuador and that just because it dropped Texaco from its name did not change anything. See its opinion at this link and footnotes 3,4 and 5:...
27.03.12 | |

17 Mar

the judgment awards to their NGO)." See above -- and, of course, I'm sure that Chevron's hundreds of lawyers are working on contingency and will get paid only if Chevron wins; they wouldn't want to compound the gross injustice the Ecuadorians are working on Chevron by being paid by the hour, would they? (And I can't help but chuckle about the irony of Professor Cassel decrying being accused of trading principle for money... and then accusing the plaintiffs' attorneys of trading principle for money.) "Chevron has repeatedly stated that it...
17.03.12 | |

17 Mar

the affected areas. 4. Chevron lawyers have been indicted in Ecuador for making false claims about Chevron’s fake “remediation” of affected sites — which included paying Ecuadorians to build houses on top of dirty sites so they could not be tested. 5. Chevron’s paid scientific consultants misrepresented epidemiological studies linking Chevron’s dumping of waste to health problem in the affected area. (See this letter signed by 50 leading scientists from all over the world.) 6. Chevron has tried to bribe the Ecuadorian government into quashing the case. 7. Chevron threatened...
17.03.12 | |

28 Oct

[Michael D. Goldhaber serves as Senior International Correspondent and “The Global Lawyer” columnist for The American Lawyer and the ALM media group. His writes widely on human rights and corporate accountability, international arbitration, and global multiforum disputes. His e-book on Chevron will be published next year by Amazon.] The ongoing media circus surrounding the Chevron v. Donziger trial in New York federal court makes it easy to forget that the arbitration between Chevron and Ecuador may be the main event in resolving the $19 billion environmental judgment entered against Chevron...
28.10.13 | |

04 Jan

...a Chevron partisan--I think the correct outcome of the US litigation should be that Chevron, having gotten the case transferred to Ecuador, should be estopped to make the assertions it is now making about the Ecuadoran judiciary. But I think your post is a little unfair to Chevron's position, because there is some real evidence to support its allegations of corruption. And if Chevron is right to argue that the Ecuadoran courts became politicized and corrupt in the interim between the forum non conveniens dismissal in New York and the...
04.01.12 | |

28 Sep

whom Chevron has targeted — nor even the only blogger. The subpoena asks Google to provide the same information for 43 other individuals, as well.) The next step was to try to determine why Chevron wanted the subpoenaed information. Perhaps not surprisingly, they wouldn’t tell us. Instead, after a number of fruitless discussions between the ACLU and Gibson Dunn, Chevron chose to withdraw the subpoena — thus ending my legal adventure, at least for now. I will likely never know why Chevron subpoenaed me. But I do know that it...
28.09.12 | |

27 Jan

This week was a blockbuster one in the ongoing battle between Chevron and Ecuador. On Wednesday, the arbitral tribunal adjudicating Chevron’s BIT claim issued an Interim Award ordering Ecuador “to take all measures at its disposal to suspend or cause to be suspended the enforcement or recognition within or without Ecuador of any judgment against [Chevron] in the Lago Agrio Case.” The tribunal was at pains to emphasize the interim award was final and binding under Article 32 of the UNCITRAL Rules, which means that Chevron could pursue recognition and...
27.01.12 | |

05 Jan

“Without such relief, the [plaintiffs] will be able immediately to commence their extortionate plan to harass Chevron through multiplicative, vexatious enforcement proceedings expressly intended to disrupt the operations of Chevron’s affiliates in foreign countries.” In its motion, Chevron argues that “The Ecuadorian appellate decision … does not purport to explain or even mention the extensive evidence that the Lago Agrio Judgment was ghostwritten by parties other than Judge Zambrano, who had secret access to the LAP’s internal, unfiled work product.” Among other things, Chevron argues that the Ecuadorian appellate judgment...
05.01.12 | |

03 Sep

It’s been a while since I’ve blogged about Chevron’s “Rainforest Chernobyl” — the company’s deliberate dumping of more than 18 billion gallons of toxic waste-water into Ecuador’s Lago Agrio region. But I want to call readers’ attention to a blockbuster new article in Rolling Stone that details the wide variety of dirty tricks Chevron has used to avoid paying the multi-billion-dollar judgment against it in Ecuador. (The plaintiffs filed the suit in the US. Chevron demanded that it be moved to Ecuador, where it expected a friendly government to ensure...
03.09.14 | |

28 Mar

Chevron had often won lawsuits. Now that it has lost the case and suffered a large but eminently fair judgment against it, Chevron has suddenly discovered that the Ecuadorian court system is somehow hopelessly corrupt. A clearer case of buyers remorse is difficult to imagine. Unfortunately for Chevron, buyers remorse is not a legal defense. Make no mistake: this is a case that pits David against Goliath. Only now Goliath is claiming that he is actually smaller than David and that David stole the slingshot he used during the fight....
28.03.12 | |

02 Apr

was first filed against Texaco and Texaco only. It was filed one year after Texaco left Ecuador in 1993. The case has lasted 19 years because Texaco and now Chevron has fought it every step of the way. Nine of those years were spent before an Ecuador court in a trial that, if you believe Chevron, was fixed. Why a “fixed” trial would take nine years to fix is a question Chevron and its legions of lawyers have not answered and none of the legal bloggers has asked, curiously. Chevron’s...
02.04.12 | |