Court absolves Union Carbide of liability in Bhopal tragedy
Related
Top Stories
- IPL spot-fixing case: Actor Vindoo Dara Singh arrested in Mumbai
- IPL 2013 LIVE SCORE: Chennai Super Kings bat, Sachin Tendulkar still out
- Pune Warriors withdraw from IPL, 'disgusted' by BCCI's attitude
- IPL spot fixing: How Sreesanth splurged money on girlfriend
- Li Keqiang visits TCS, Cyrus P Mistry says China important for growth of Tata Group

In a setback to the victims of the Bhopal gas tragedy, a US court has held that neither Union Carbide nor its former chairman Warren Anderson were liable for environmental remediation or pollution-related claims emanating from the world's worst industrial accident.
US District Judge John Keena in Manhattan dismissed a lawsuit accusing the company of causing soil and water pollution around the Bhopal plant due to the disaster, and ruled that Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) and Anderson were not liable for remediation or pollution-related claims.
The court ruled that it was Union Carbide India Ltd, and not its parent company UCC that was responsible for the generation and disposal of the waste that polluted drinking water, and the liability rests with the state government.
Plaintiffs Janki Bai Sahu and others had alleged that "toxic substances seeped into a ground aquifer, polluting the soil and drinking water supply in residential communities surrounding the former Bhopal Plant site".
They alleged that exposure to soil and drinking water polluted by hazardous waste produced Union Carbine India Ltd caused injuries.
"The summary judgement record certainly indicates that UCIL consulted with UCC about its waste disposal plans and on non-environmental business matter like its strategic plan. However, nothing in the evidence suggests the necessity of UCC's approval for the actions about which plaintiffs complain," the court said in its order.
"Moreover, there is no evidence in this extensive record indicating that UCIL manufactured pesticides on UCC's behalf, entered into contracts or other business dealings on UCC's behalf, or otherwise acted in UCC's name," it said.
In his written opinion, Judge Keenan concluded that -- even when viewing the evidence in the most favourable light for the plaintiffs -- UCC is not directly liable, nor liable as an agent of UCIL, nor liable under a veil-piercing analysis.
... contd.
Editors’ Pick
- 'Sophisticated' Indian cyberattacks targeted Pak military sites: Report
- Talkative Li quoted Weber, Hegel, Jobs, said PM is large-hearted
- Bihar food corp ends up with chaff as rice worth Rs 535 cr vanishes from mills
- In 7 lucrative minutes on May 9, Sreesanth bowled 6 balls, bookie made Rs 2.5 cr
- India and China ask border envoys to work on more steps
- Former Ranji player among 3 more held
- Rajasthan Royals to file FIR against tainted trio
- Family of theft accused allege police torture
- After Khalid’s death, Muslim leaders want govt to make Nimesh panel report public
- Meteoroid impact triggers bright flash on the moon
- Cobrapost sting: NABARD chief gives clean chit to co-operative banks
- Google Maps leads Chinese man abducted 23 years ago back home


Patrol: 5 die in limo fire on California bridge
US Democrat leader under fire for making xenophobic comments against Nikki Haley
No one wants to bury Boston Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev
Samsung, BlackBerry devices cleared for use on Pentagon networks




















