Get the latest Chevron Ecuador lawsuit news. This category covers recent 2015 lawsuit news and the latest on Steven Donziger, the attorney that used corrupt means to obtain a 2011 court verdict in Ecuador.
James Craig is a spokesman for the US oil company Chevron and argues that if the plaintiffs succeed in executing the Lago Agrio ruling in any country, Ecuador must compensate Chevron. Read more>>
Amazonia Recovery Ltd. was a Gibraltar company set up to hold the proceeds of the Lago Agrio judgment, or maybe the judgment itself. As I’ve reported previously, Chevron obtained a default judgment against the firm in Gibraltar, and in the New York RICO case, the final judgment required Steven Donziger, the LAPs’ American lawyer, to execute a stock power assigning to Chevron his interest in Amazonia. This injunction has led to a strange satellite litigation. Chevron claimed that Donziger, when executing the stock power, had attached an “addendum” that asserted that the transfer of the shares was impermissible. The addendum asserted that the Amazonia entity was “null and void,” and perhaps that it did not even exist anymore. Judge Kaplan therefore made a very specific order, requiring Donziger to provide the stock power without any addendum, signed and acknowledged before a notary. There was some more skirmishing—I have read the papers so you don’t have to. Read more>>
Chevron Corp. told a New York federal court on Monday that attorney Steven Donziger, who helped procure a fraudulent $9.5 billion judgment in Ecuador over pollution in the Amazon, should be jailed if he continues refusing to transfer his interest in the proceeds of that judgment to Chevron. U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan had reiterated last month that Donziger had to transfer to Chevron his interest in a Gibraltar-based company called Amazonia Recovery Ltd., which had been formed to collect and distribute any proceeds from the $9.5 billion Ecuadorian judgment. The order followed up on a directive the judge had made in an opinion issued in the case more than four years ago, in which he concluded that the $9.5 billion ruling had been “ghostwritten” by Donziger and other members of the legal team who represented indigenous Ecuadorians in a lawsuit against Chevron over extensive environmental damage in the Amazon decades ago. The key findings of that decision were largely echoed in a ruling issued by an international tribunal in The Hague late last month. Read more>>
Well, folks, the book is closing on this massive conspiracy, and I for one am glad that Chevron didn’t cave, didn’t agree to settle, and never “bought the peace” from attorneys Donziger and Fajardo. For on September 7, 2018 an international tribunal administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague unanimously issued an award in favor of Chevron and its indirect subsidiary, Texaco Petroleum Company (TexPet). Read more>>
Chevron Corp. said on Friday an international tribunal ruled in its favor in an environmental dispute with Ecuador, finding the South American nation had violated its obligations under international treaties. The tribunal unanimously held that a $9.5 billion pollution judgment by Ecuador’s Supreme Court against Chevron “was procured through fraud, bribery and corruption and was based on claims that had been already settled and released by the Republic of Ecuador years earlier.” Read more>>
The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague has ruled in favor of oil giant Chevron and declared Ecuador guilty of violating a bilateral investment treaty signed with the United States in 1997, of withholding justice from the company, and for not providing Chevron with “just and equitable” treatment. The announcement was made Friday morning by Ecuador’s Solicitor General Iñigo Salvador, who gave a statement on the main points of the ruling in a press conference.
An UNCITRAL tribunal has ruled that a US$9.5 billion Ecuadorean court judgment that held Chevron liable for environmental contamination in the Amazon was procured through fraud and violated Ecuador’s obligations under international law. In a 521-page partial award released today, a tribunal administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague unanimously upheld claims by Chevron and its subsidiary Texaco Petroleum that Ecuador committed a denial of justice under customary international law and the US-Ecuador bilateral investment treaty.
Chevron Corp said on Friday an international tribunal ruled in its favor in an environmental dispute with Ecuador, finding the South American nation had violated its obligations under international treaties.
An international tribunal found the Republic of Ecuador violated a treaty with the U.S. by allowing its court system to issue a $9.5 billion judgment against Chevron Corp. in an environmental case. The Friday ruling by the international arbitration court in The Hague further bolsters Chevron’s campaign to invalidate the 2011 Ecuadorean judgment, which sought to hold the energy giant responsible for environmental damage in an Amazonian village.
An international tribunal in The Hague has concluded that a $9.5 billion judgment issued against Chevron Corp. by an Ecuadorian court over pollution in the Amazon was tainted by fraud, and that Ecuador wrongfully enforced the ruling in that country, according to documents released on Friday.
Having utterly failed in its efforts to enforce a fraudulently obtained multi-billion-dollar judgment against Chevron in the domestic courts of United States, Canada, Brazil, Argentina and Gibraltar, Ecuador is now on the defensive before international tribunals.
On July 10, 2018, Steven Donziger, a New York lawyer and a basketball buddy of Barack Obama’s, was suspended indefinitely from the practice of law in the state of New York. A New York court ordered the suspension for professional misconduct, based on “uncontroverted evidence” that Donziger and his legal team helped secure a judgment against Chevron Corp. in Ecuador through dishonesty and chicanery. Specifically: “judicial coercion, corruption of a court expert and ghostwriting of his report, misrepresentations concerning the expert’s independence, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, improperly threatening criminal prosecution, and judicial bribery.” While Donziger contested the process, the court ruling notes that he “chose not to challenge the underlying factual findings.” Read more>>