Litigation Against Royal Dutch Shell
New York Times: "Shell Oil Shareholders Awarded $110 Million"13 December 1990
New York Times: "Shell Settles Dumping Suit for $3 Million": 9 February 1995
New York Times: "New Settlement In Plumbing Suit": 9 November 1995
New York Times: "SHELL SETTLES ROYALTIES CASE FOR $33.5 MILLION": 21 March 2002
Mail On Sunday: Shell Chief had private army: 4 April 2004
Dow Jones Article: US Court Ruling Paves For Shell Settlement To Proceed: 19 November 2007 (The ruling was first obtained by Shell critics' Website Royaldutchshellplc.com, which has posted 2,000 pages of extracts from the case.)
NPCA scored a victory for industry with a California Superior Court’s tentative decision which rules against Shell Oil in favor of the State of California and intervenor NPCA.
The court’s conclusion was fatal to Shell’s case because Shell failed to present any evidence under the relevant standard.
Plaintiff Shell Oil brought this action (Equilon Enterprises LLC dba Shell Oil Products US vs. California State Board of Equalization and California Department of Health Services) in 2005 seeking a refund of the $3,910,359.10 in Child Lead Poisoning Prevention Act fees assessed against Shell in 2002. NPCA successfully intervened in the suit in order to oppose Shell’s demand that the allocation be changed to place virtually the entire financial burden of the program on the coatings industry.
In particular, in weighing the credibility of the evidence, the Court specifically found that the correspondence and evidence established that the key Shell experts had a “predetermined mindset of the results of the study, prior to engaging in any research.”
allAfrica.com: South Africa: Apartheid Victims to Sue Multinationals: 13 May 2008
Cape Town — Victims of apartheid who are suing 23 leading multinational corporations in American courts on the grounds that the companies collaborated with the policy have been given clearance to take their case forward.
The United States Supreme Court issued an order in Washington, DC, on Monday affirming a decision by a lower court, the effect of which is to allow the case to go ahead.
Khulumani said its case targetted the multinationals "for having aided and abetted the perpetration of gross human rights violations in South Africa under apartheid by equipping and financing the apartheid government's military and security agencies."
It said all the defendants had operations in apartheid South Africa, and it was seeking damages for "specific violations of internationally recognized human rights norms... by the apartheid government following the United Nations' classification of apartheid as a crime against humanity."
It named the defendants in the case as: Barclay National Bank Ltd., British Petroleum, PLC, Chevrontexaco Corporation, Chevrontexaco Global Energy, Inc., Citigroup, Inc., Commerzbank, Credit Suisse Group, Daimlerchrysler AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Dresdner Bank AG, Exxonmobil Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Fujitsu, Ltd., General Motors Corporations, International Business Machines Corp., J.P. Morgan Chase, Shell Oil Company, UBS AG, AEG Daimler-Benz Industrie, Fluor Corporation, Rheinmetall Group AG, Rio Tinto Group and Total-Fina-Elf.
The Times of Zambia: US firms to pay for apartheid: 14 May 2008
Millions of South Africans are eligible to join a class-action lawsuit against US-based multinational corporations accused of aiding and abetting the apartheid government.
This follows a ruling by the US Supreme Court on Monday, which upheld a lower court’s decision to allow a civil case to proceed.
The civil case against major multinationals includes a damages claim and two class-action suits under the US Alien Tort Claims Act, an 18th century law that allows foreigners to sue in US courts.
“ The case has been hailed as a potential catalyst in advancing international human rights law.” Among the companies that face litigation are IBM, BP, Credit Suisse, Daimler, Deutsche Bank, Exxonmobil , Ford Motor, General Motors and Shell.
A probe by the Securities and Exchange Commission is also under way, it said.
In its annual report with the SEC, the Anglo-Dutch oil company said it was contacted in July by the Department of Justice regarding its use of a unit of Panalpina World Transport Ltd., a Swiss-based shipping and logistics-management company.
Shell said in the filling the Justice Department was looking at potential violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as a result of such use. Shell declined to comment beyond the filings Wednesday.
Baltimore Sun: Class action settlements may aid in repairing leaky pipes: 5 September 2008
USAToday: NYC trial date for claims against Shell: 9 October 2008
Times Herald: Coweta files suit against Shell Oil Company: 23 October 2008 (Connected to New Settlement in Plumbing Suit?)
Reuters: Environmentalists, Nigerians plan to sue Shell: 5 November 2008
Wall Street Journal: Chevron Case Weighs Extent of Overseas Liability: 1 December 2008
Shell Oil Company Limestone Township $26 million settlement: December 2007
KANKAKEE CLASS ACTION: Limestone Class Action: December 2008
RPT-Shell agrees to settle TX refinery pollution suit: 23 April 2009
Houston Chronicle: Shell will pay millions to settle air pollution suit: 23 April 2009
New York Times: Shell Settles Air Pollution Suit: 23 April 2009
Bloomberg: Shell Must Defend Nigerian Rights Suit, Judge Says: 23 April 2009
Bloomberg: Companies Win at U.S. Supreme Court on Cleanup Costs: 4 May 2009
Reuters: Shell Oil, railroads win U.S. ruling on cleanup costs: 4 May 2009
BusinessWorld: Supreme Court tells Shell to pay P209M in duties: 26 June 2009
Guardian: Shell agrees to pay compensation for execution of Saro-Wiwa and ...
Ken Saro-Wiwa in 1993. Photograph: Greenpeace/AFP. The oil giant Shell has agreed to pay $15.5m (£9.6m) in settlement of a legal action in which it was ... June 2009
The Times: Shell agrees $15.5m settlement over death of Saro-Wiwa and eight others: 9 June 2009
Jury Awards $50 Million in Punitive Damages Against Shell Oil Subsidiary: 12 March 2010