Limiting Corporate Impunity through Public and Private International Law
Ilaria Pretelli
Improving Social Sustainability through Cross-Border Public Interests Litigation
The scientific community is faced with the urgent task of rethinking and deconstructing the traditional, clichéd roles of public and private actors in socioenvironmental governance. Sociologists have used legal pluralism theory to show that a society's legal order is not exclusively determined by the public authorities of the state that govern it. On the other hand, economists have acknowledged that corporate profit-making does not inherently promote a state's economic welfare. Environmental studies have drawn attention to the long-term consequences of private decisions seeking short-term profit advantage, including the associated costs. Since business activities, especially those of multinational corporations, are neither socially nor environmentally neutral, a wide range of legal strategies is under scrutiny to create new legal frameworks that delegitimise current neoliberal stereot...
U heeft op dit moment geen toegang tot de volledige inhoud van dit product. U kunt alleen de inleiding en hoofdstukindeling lezen.
Wanneer u volledige toegang wenst tot alle informatie kunt u zich abonneren of inloggen als abonnee.
Verder in dit artikel:
Improving Social Sustainability through Cross-Border Public Interests Litigation
1. Deconstructing the Public and Private Dimensions of Governance
1.1. Mass Claims, Public Interests Litigation and Strategic Litigation
1.2. Social Groups Affected by Non-democratic Decisions of Private Companies
1.2.1. Workers and their families
1.2.2. Clients, consumers and their families
1.2.3. Victims of damage to the environment in which the production company operates, especially in the Global South
1.2.4. Creditors
1.2.5. Shareholders
1.3. Profit Maximisation through the Use of Legal Loopholes
1.3.1. The Use of Private International Law and Comparative Law to Reduce Socio-Enviromental Standards
1.3.2. The Externalisation of Costs
1.3.3. Tax Avoidance
1.4. Profit Maximisation through Negligent, Deliberate or Criminal Violations of Fundamental Rights
1.4.1. Liability for negligence or imprudence in the management of the chain of activities
1.4.2. Violations of Fundamental Rights or Indiscriminate Mass Consequences of Corporate Policies
1.4.3. Criminal Obstruction of Justice
1.5. Alternative Business Models and Corporate Governance Strategies
2. Governance via Public and Private International Law
2.1. The Place of Decision-Making as Head of Jurisdiction
2.2. The Place of Decision-Making as the Proper Law of Torts in the Value Chain
3. The etiology of damage and its consequences in private international law
3.1. The etiology of socio-environmental damage and duty of care
3.2. The etiology of corporate crime
3.3. Significance of the Etiologic Connection for Private International Law
4. Conclusions
