Chevron fails to block $18 billion Ecuador judgment

WASHINGTON Tue Oct 9, 2012 4:24pm EDT

1 of 2. Environmentalist Donald Moncayo shows his glove after conducting a test made on an affected field in Lago Agrio, Ecuador in this January 25, 2011 file photograph. Chevron Corp on October 9, 2012 lost a U.S. Supreme Court bid to block an $18.2 billion judgment against it in Ecuador in a case over pollution in the Amazon jungle. The Supreme Court did not give any explanation for its decision, which rejected Chevron's appeal of a lower court ruling. The lower court in January had thrown out an injunction blocking enforcement of the Ecuadorean judgment.

Credit: Reuters/Guillermo Granja/Files

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Chevron Corp on Tuesday lost a U.S. Supreme Court bid to block an $18.2 billion judgment against it in Ecuador in a case over pollution in the Amazon jungle.

The Supreme Court did not give any explanation for its decision, which rejected Chevron's appeal of a lower court ruling. The lower court in January had thrown out an injunction blocking enforcement of the Ecuadorean judgment.

The decision is the latest in a nearly two-decade conflict between the No. 2 U.S. oil company and residents of Ecuador's Lago Agrio region over claims that Texaco, bought by Chevron in 2001, contaminated the area from 1964 to 1992. The battle has spawned litigation in numerous courts both inside and outside the United States.

Oil companies are watching the case closely because it may affect other cases accusing companies of polluting the areas where they operate.

Chevron claims that the judgment, imposed by an Ecuadorean court in February 2011, was fraudulent and unenforceable under New York law.

In March 2011, a federal judge in New York issued a worldwide injunction blocking enforcement of the judgment. But on January 26, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York overturned the ban, finding that Chevron had been premature to challenge the judgment.

The 2nd Circuit said the oil company, based in San Ramon, California, could challenge it "only defensively, in response to attempted enforcement," which the Lago Agrio residents had not attempted and might never attempt in New York.

The appeals court also said that the U.S. judge did not have the authority to stop courts in other countries from enforcing the judgment. The Ecuadorean plaintiffs are currently trying to enforce the judgment in Canada and Brazil.

In its appeal to the Supreme Court, Chevron said it was entitled to raise an anticipatory defense in U.S. courts to preempt any enforcement efforts.

It also said such defenses are necessary in light of the "disturbing trend" in which lawyers win big money judgments against U.S. companies in corrupt foreign courts, and then seek to enforce them in countries where the companies operate.

Chevron's shares were up 32 cents at $117.94 on Tuesday afternoon.

"While Chevron is disappointed that the Court denied our petition, we will continue to defend against the plaintiffs' lawyers' attempts to enforce the fraudulent Ecuadorean judgment, and to further expose their misconduct," Chevron said in an emailed statement.

The company is pursuing a racketeering suit against a New York attorney, Steven Donziger, a group of Ecuadoreans and environmental groups that helped win the judgment, accusing them of intimidation and extortion.

It has also challenged the judgment before an international arbitration panel under a trade agreement between the United States and Ecuador. The panel is scheduled to begin hearing the dispute in November.

The judgment included $8.6 billion of environmental damages, which an Ecuador court more than doubled because Chevron failed to make a public apology.

In July, damages in the case were increased to $19 billion.

Justice Samuel Alito, a conservative, did not participate in the Supreme Court's decision to deny the appeal. The court's order provided no reason.

The case is Chevron Corp v. Naranjo et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 11-1428.

(Reporting by Terry Baynes and Jonathan Stempel; editing by John Wallace and Marguerita Choy)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (10)
AlkalineState wrote:
What’s funny is that Chevron is the party that got this case moved to Ecuador in the first place. They were hoping they could buy off the local politicians and judges there again. Chevron’s claim at the time was “This happened in Ecuador, the case should be heard in Ecuador.”

Then when it did not go their way, they claimed that the local court had no jurisdiction over a foreign company. That the case should definitely be heard in the U.S. Supreme Court. Well, the U.S. Supreme Court disagrees.

Chevron lost because they were wrong. They made the mess, they lost the case, time to pay up. Their oil should be sanctioned until they fix this.

Oct 09, 2012 4:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
neahkahnie wrote:
This is not the “good old days,” of U.S. corporate rule over foreign countries. You do business in foreign countries, and guess what, you have to abide by their laws. Chavez, in Venezuela, as well as Castro in Cuba, changed the dynamic.

Oct 09, 2012 5:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:
In Chevron’s defense, the oil companies are really hurting right now :)

They’re practically GIVING gasoline away at the pump.

Oct 09, 2012 5:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.