The submission argues that the Court of Appeal's conclusion that Vedanta arguably owed the Claimants a duty of care is supported by:

(i) international standards regarding the responsibilities of business enterprises in relation to human rights and environmental protection;

(ii) material published by the UK government with the aim of implementing those international standards; and

(iii) comparative law jurisprudence.  

Vedanta has stated that its "sustainable development agenda" has been developed in line with the international standards to which the submission refers.

These standards are therefore relevant to the factual question of whether Vedanta controlled and/or had assumed responsibility for the activities of its Zambian subsidiary, Konkola