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

이 페이지는 한국어로 제공되지 않으며 English로 표시됩니다.

기사

2010년 6월 28일

저자:
US District Court for the Southern District of New York

Shan v. China Construction Bank Corp. Opinion & Order [USA]

Chinese national...Shan... sued his former employer, China Construction Bank... alleging torture...in violation of customary international law...pursuant to the Alien Tort Statute...In seeking to hold the Bank liable...the plaintiff asserts three alternative theories...First,...the Bank...may be held directly liable as a principal. Second,...the Bank [may be] liable as a aider-and-abettor of the Chinese police. Third,...the Bank [may be] a co-conspirator of the Chinese police...Plaintiff...failed to state a plausible theory of...liability...China Construction Bank...motion to dismiss is granted...

타임라인