abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Diese Seite ist nicht auf Deutsch verfügbar und wird angezeigt auf English

Artikel

1 Mär 2013

Autor:
Ed Crooks, Financial Times

Long fight ahead in BP oil spill trial [USA]

[In the first week of the trial,] [t]he plaintiffs aim to show that pressure from senior management to hold down costs led to BP staff cutting corners on the Macondo well, causing the fatal explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig and the subsequent leak of an estimated 4m barrels of oil into the waters of the gulf…BP agreed a settlement a year ago for tens of thousands of private sector plaintiffs, which is now expected to cost $8.5bn. Transocean, owner and operator of the Deepwater Horizon rig, in January agreed a $1.4bn settlement of the civil and criminal charges against it from the US government…A settlement is still possible, although…that becomes less likely with every passing week…By fighting in court, BP sets itself up for a year or more of uncertainty over the final cost of the spill, which it could resolve quickly by agreeing a settlement…Michael Underhill, the lead lawyer for the [Department of Justice]…[argued] that he intended to prove “wilful misconduct”, a higher standard than gross negligence...which in turn is higher than the ordinary negligence that BP has admitted…It is still entirely possible that Judge Barbier will…rule that there was wilful misconduct, or try to split the difference between that and BP’s admission of ordinary negligence with a finding of gross negligence. Either of those two outcomes would expose BP to Clean Water Act penalties of up to $17.6bn, and many billions in punitive damages for the states and private sector.

Zeitleiste

Informationen zum Datenschutz

Diese Website verwendet Cookies und andere Web-Speichertechnologien. Sie können Ihre Datenschutzeinstellungen unten festlegen. Die Änderungen werden sofort wirksam.

Weitere Informationen über unsere Nutzung von Webspeicherung finden Sie in unserer Richtlinie zur Datennutzung und Cookies

Strictly necessary storage

ON
OFF

Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.

Analytics-Cookie

ON
OFF

When you access our website we use Google Analytics to collect information on your visit. Accepting this cookie will allow us to understand more details about your journey, and improve how we surface information. All analytics information is anonymous and we do not use it to identify you. Google provides a Google Analytics opt-out add on for all popular browsers.

Promotional cookies

ON
OFF

We share news and updates on business and human rights through third party platforms, including social media and search engines. These cookies help us to understand the performance of these promotions.

Ihre Privatsphäre-Einstellungen für diese Website

Diese Website verwendet Cookies und andere Web-Speichertechnologien, um Ihre Erfahrung über die notwendigen Kernfunktionen hinaus zu verbessern.