Summary rulings – Human Rights Insights

Yves Rocher found liable under the French Duty of Vigilance Law over retaliation against unionised workers in Turkey

On 12 March 2026, the Paris civil court found the French beauty brand Yves Rocher liable for failing in its duty of vigilance regarding its activities in Turkey, specifically anti-unionisation practices. Following a membership campaign launched in January 2018 by the Petrol-Is trade union among the workers of Yves Rocher’s Turkish subsidiary, which led to the recognition of the union representativeness within the subsidiary (157 workers out of 379), in May 2018, a major wave of dismissals was carried out, with 132 employees fired; a retaliation against unionised workers.

In this unprecedent ruling, the court confirmed that the Duty of Vigilance Law applies to the activities of French companies’ subsidiaries operating abroad and ordered the company to compensate some employees. However, due to a restrictive interpretation of an agreement reached between the Turkish subsidiary and employees by the court, most plaintiffs’ claim for compensation was considered inadmissible, highly limiting Yves Rocher’s accountability and access to remedy for claimants.

French Duty of Vigilance Law and the formal notice requirement – 2024 clarifications

Since the adoption of the 2017 Duty of vigilance law, claimants have faced multiple procedural obstacles leading to the dismissal of their cases. In particular, judges have misinterpreted the obligation for claimants to give formal notice to companies prior to filing a complaint, using a flawed interpretation of the legislator’s intention to establish dialogue between companies and their stakeholders. Such misapplication of the law was rightfully overruled by the Paris court of appeal in two key rulings (here and here) on June 18, 2024.

Alien Tort Statute and Cisco case: Court of Appeal allows proceedings to continue

On July 7, 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that proceedings against Cisco System under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) can proceed. In this decade long trial, practitioners of Falun Gong – a Chinese religious movement – alleged that they or family members were victims of human rights abuses including torture, arbitrary detention, forced labour, extrajudicial killing and forced disappearance committed by the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese government officials. According to the claimants, the alleged abuses were enabled by technological assistance of Cisco System, a US company which designed, implemented and helped to maintain a surveillance and internal security network (the Golden Shield system) for Chinese officials, greatly enhancing their capacity to identify Falun Gong practitioners and persecute them. In 2011, claimants sued Cisco for aiding and abetting Chinese officials in violation of the ATS.

Corporate accountability under the French Duty of vigilance law, just an illusion?

On June 1, 2023, Paris civil court dismissed NGOs’ claim brough on the ground of the Duty of vigilance law against Suez regarding its activities in Chile. Once again, the judge considered that claimants did not give proper formal notice. The rationale used and its outcome raises the question of effective corporate accountability five years after the adoption of the law and at the time of EU negotiations on a Directive on human rights and environmental due diligence.

Proceedings against Lafarge for complicity in crimes against humanity can go on says France’s highest judicial court

On September 7, 2021, the French Cour de Cassation (the highest judicial court) overruled (in French) the Paris Court of Appeal decision to dismiss the claim of complicity in crime against humanity against Lafarge. Lafarge’s Syrian subsidiary, more than 98% owned by the French parent company, paid over $15 million to terrorist groups, including ISIS through middlemen between 2013 and 2014 to maintain the activity of its cement plant.

PTTEP Australasia liable for oil spill impacting 15 000 Indonesian farmers

On March 19, 2021, the Federal Court of Australia found in the Sanda v PTTEP Australasia class action case representing over 15 000 Indonesian seaweed farmers, that the oil company breached its duty of care owed to them when suspending and operating an oil well which consequently led to an oil spill in 2009 impacting farmers’ livelihood.

UK shipping company may owe a duty of care to shipbreaking workers in Bangladesh

On March 10, 2021, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales found in the Begun v Maran case that the claim for damages brought by the widow of a shipbreaking worker killed while working on an oil tanker in a shipyard in Bangladesh against shipping company Maran was not bound to fail as Maran UK may had owed a duty of care to the deceased worker. Considering that most oil tankers are broken up in Bangladesh, this may have important consequences across the shipping industry.

Proceedings against Shell for oil spills in Nigeria can go on says the UK Supreme Court

Hard times for Shell. On 12 February 2021, two weeks after the Court of Appeal of The Hague found Shell subsidiary and parent company liable for oil spills in Nigeria in a landmark ruling, the UK Supreme Court, in a much awaited ruling, confirmed that proceedings against the parent company could continue before UK courts for similar issues raised by Nigerian farming and fishing communities, as real issues were to be tried.

Landmark ruling: Shell subsidiary and parent company found liable for oil spills in Nigeria

On January 29, 2021, the Court of Appeals of The Hague found in two judgements (cases A and B and cases C and D in Dutch) Shell Nigeria (SPDC) and its parent company Royal Dutch Shell (RDS) responsible for oil spills in the Niger Delta in Nigeria.

Trump administration against corporate liability for human rights violations under Alien Tort Statute

On May 26, 2020, the Trump administration filed a brief amicus curiae in the Cargill Inc. v John Doe case, urging the Supreme Court to hold that domestic corporations cannot be liable for human rights violations under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS).

In this case, former child slaves who were forced to work on cocoa farms in the Ivory Coast claim that Nestle US and Cargill aided and abetted slave labour by providing financial support and technical farming aid to famers, subjecting defendants to suit under the ATS.