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

このページは 日本語 では利用できません。English で表示されています

記事

2024年3月12日

著者:
Wiliam S. Dodge, UC Davis School of Law, on Transnational Litigation Blog

USA: US companies cannot be held liable under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act simply for buying products made with forced labour, rules DC Circuit Court

Guilhem Vellut on flickr

"D.C. Circuit Defines "Venture" Under the TVPRA," 12 March 2024

...The D.C. Circuit issued its... opinion in Doe v. Apple, a suit against U.S. tech companies seeking to hold them liable under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) for forced labor and human trafficking used to mine cobalt in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). ...

The court... held that plaintiffs failed to state a claim for relief because purchasing cobalt through the global supply chain is not “participation in a venture,” which the TVPRA requires for liability. ...

The D.C. Circuit did not answer the question whether the TVPRA’s civil cause of action applies extraterritorially. ...

The plaintiffs in Doe are children, and the family members of children, who were injured or killed mining cobalt in the DRC. ...

Plaintiffs sued five U.S. tech companies—Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Dell, and Tesla—that purchase cobalt through supply chains to power their products, alleging that they benefitted from participation in a venture that they knew or should have known engaged in forced labor and human trafficking...

The court of appeals addressed only the first two grounds, holding that the plaintiffs had standing but had not adequately alleged participation in a venture. ...

“[P]urchasing a commodity, without more, is not ‘participation in a venture’ with the seller,” the court concluded. ...The court concluded that “participation in a venture” means: “taking part or sharing in an enterprise or undertaking that involves danger, uncertainty, or risk, and potential gain.”

The D.C. Circuit’s decision in Doe v. Apple makes clear that U.S. companies cannot be held liable under the TVPRA simply for buying products made with forced labor. More is required for “participation in a venture.” But if that requirement is satisfied, victims of forced labor abroad should be able to sue U.S. companies regardless of how the extraterritoriality question is resolved.

プライバシー情報

このサイトでは、クッキーやその他のウェブストレージ技術を使用しています。お客様は、以下の方法でプライバシーに関する選択肢を設定することができます。変更は直ちに反映されます。

ウェブストレージの使用についての詳細は、当社の データ使用およびクッキーに関するポリシーをご覧ください

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.

クッキーのアナリティクス

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.

本サイトにおけるお客様のプライバシーに関する選択

このサイトでは、必要なコア機能を超えてお客様の利便性を高めるために、クッキーやその他のウェブストレージ技術を使用しています。