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

Cette page n’est pas disponible en Français et est affichée en English

Procès

15 Jui 2016

Seafood exporters lawsuit (re human trafficking in Thailand)

Statut : ONGOING

Date de dépôt de la plainte
15 Jui 2016
Exactitude de la date
Année et Mois corrects
Inconnu
Travailleurs migrants et immigrés
Lieu de dépôt de la plainte: États-Unis d'Amérique
Lieu de l'incident: Thaïlande
Type de litige: Transnational

Entreprises

Rubicon États-Unis d'Amérique Traitement des déchets

Sources

Snapshot

In June 2016, seven Cambodian former employees at a Thai seafood factory that produces seafood for export to the USA filed a civil lawsuit in a California federal court against two US (Rubicon Resources LLC, Wales & Co Universe) and two Thai companies (Phatthana Seafood and SS Frozen Food).  The lawsuit also mentions Walmart as one of Phatthana Seafood’s customers. In November 2016, the court denied the defendants' motion and ruled that the lawsuit can proceed.

Factual background

While employed in the factory, the plaintiffs allegedly suffered from severe working and living conditions, underpayment, unlawful salary reductions, restrictions of movement and other serious abuses.

Legal argument

The lawsuit also alleges human trafficking, forced labour and servitude.

Legal proceedings

The companies filed a motion to dismiss the complaint arguing that the alleged conduct occurred outside the USA and the court did not have jurisdiction over the case.  In November 2016, the court denied the defendants' motion and ruled that the lawsuit can proceed.

Chronologie