Alumina Inc: Recognizing And Minimizing Tort And Regulatory Risk

However, Edward’s contract was not renewed after this complaint. (Paynter 94) Soon after, the Washington Post exposed this cover up to the public. (Paynter 94) As a result of this exposed story, the EPA advised people to flush their water lines. (Paynter 94) However, the EPA’s health advice “actually increased [lead] exposure” (Paynter 94) to the whole water line. Soon after, congressional investigations found that “hundreds, maybe thousands, of children had been affected [because] municipal authority in DC had disregarded test results for years” (Paynter 94). This catastrophe is almost similar to the situation that occurred in Flint. It was a result of government back tracking and ignoring common warning signs. However, this occurred during 2003, before the massive explosion of mobile devices and the Internet. There was little public response unlike the incident in Flint that occurred a decade later.

MTC initially needed to obtain substantial investment capital due to two main factors: a research-heavy industry, and the need to create most of the markets for its products. Although the founders' goal was to become a major manufacturing company, they did estimate that the company would need $50 million in capital before it would become self-sufficient. Their initial financing model was to first recruit a superior technical team, use that to attract additional equity investment and development funding from interested corporations, and then develop manufacturing capabilities. Commercial sales began 2.5 years after inception, and MTC is nearing the break-even point in 1990.

This passage reminded me about this book I read, ‘’ Civil Action,’’ the book was resolves around the illegal dumping of the industrial chemical solvent, trichloroethylene, and how it contaminated the city’s drinking water causing Leukemia, cancer and other health issues among the people of Woburn. For instance, there were 12 deaths (8 of them children). However, a law suit was brought to this company since a young boy died of Leukemia. The government need to be held accountable for these damage since they are the one who are making the rules. I believe that the health of citizens should always come first no matter what. I wonder when other companies are going to spend forward admitting to what they are doing to our environment? When will

In today 's business world regulations set the benchmark that guarantees a secure, coherent and fair marketplace for everyone (Canada Business Ontario, n.d). Whether you are starting or developing a company, associations need to meet certain regulations and guidelines to remain compliant, and to build the productivity and validity of their business (Government of Canada, 2014). This paper examines the struggle Mineral Mountain Resources Ltd. faced with the new Ontario mining regulation.

The United States is blessed with an abundance of natural resources, including waterways, arable land, precious minerals, wildlife, coal, and forests. However, it is evident that growing business operations significantly impact the environment and that pollution is an unfortunate by-product of manufactured consumer goods. In the event a company produces pollution or damages the environment, it may be held liable to private persons, in addition to being required to pay a fine. There are several theories of law under which a private individual may bring a lawsuit against a firm for creating pollution. Negligence is a tort that allows a plaintiff to bring suit against a defendant for causing personal injury or property damage. Businesses that generate

449. That case presented the question of whether manganese welding fumes constitute pollution under an insured’s commercial general liability policy. In that case, the Court of Appeals reaffirmed the position articulated in Sullins, and held “that the policy exclusion does not apply beyond traditional environmental pollution situations.” Clendenin Bros., 390 Md. at 466; but see Chubb Custom Ins. Co. v. Std. Fusee Corp., 2 N.E.3d 752, 761 (Ind. App. 2014) (criticizing the “environmental pollution” standard articulated in Clendenin Bros. and Sullins as “[w]e-know-it-when-we-see-it” reasoning). Following the court’s opinion in Clendenin Bros., it was apparent that the text of the then-existing pollution exclusion would be interpreted in a manner that would limit it to “environment pollution.” The question as to what constituted “environment pollution,” however, had yet to be

In this essay, I will be writing to show whether I believe litigation, ADR, or criminal prosecution is the appropriate response the three scenarios presented. The three examples given were a secretary who has been taking money from the company she works for, with the intent of paying it back but never did; a little girl who was rendered brain damaged as a result of swallowing the toy finger of the toy doll that her father purchased for her; and a company that loss money as a result of not being able to ship product due to receiving an incorrect shipment from one of their suppliers.

Nevertheless, they even get around the law. For instance the “Water Pollution Control Act”, the “Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation Act”, “Industrial Site Recovery Act”, and “Solid Waste Management Act”, “Major Hazardous Waste Facilities Closure and Contingency Fund Act.” To name a few, but it appears that they are broken by corporations every day. Today we get word of the court case and the fines, but what is being exercised to protect the

The Clean Air Act requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to classify air pollutants and set air quality standards accordingly, in order to regulate/lower pollution levels. The EPA (defendant) issued a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) ruling that applied to the lead industry. The Lead Industries Association (plaintiff), disagreed with this action taken by the EPA and filed suit accordingly, arguing that the NAAQS set for lead by the EPA was not justified by conclusive evidence, and therefore was not what the Clean Air Act intended. Because scientific data on lead was actively being collected, the LIA argued that that this NAAQS was based on incomplete studies that had not yet proven the legitimate risk of health

The debate over environmental justice has stretched momentously in recent times. The result of these debates show growing challenges with regard to pending ecological problems that may require an effective management, judicial system, and ethical principle in response to this crisis. These debates have far more consequences when it involves human rights, equality, and ethical principles. For example, environmental and ethical principles should involve moral reasoning that concerns a particular environmental problem. This conclusion should be the basis of environmental justice and sustainable solutions and adequacy. This example demonstrates how Natural Gas Pipelines, pipeline safety, and natural gas fracturing safety concerns challenge us to follow these

Throughout this case I believe that there are two groups of ethical decision makers the copper companies and the courts hearing the case(s). Once the issue was brought to the attention of the copper companies they still never made any efforts to try and fix the problem or compensate the farmers. They immediately went into defense mode. The courts became the ethical decision makers once the case was brought to them. It was then their responsibility to ensure justice was served and the rights of those involved on both sides were protected under the law.

The company was dumping polychlorinated biphenyls in early 1990. The judges found that the dominant priority of the case was the protection of the environment and the human well being by avoiding the usage of certain substances. The judges, however, based their arguments through the pith and substance act and how it was applied to the law.

Over 30, 000 people were injured after Trafigura, the third-largest oil trader in the world, disposed tonnes of toxic material on West Africa’s streets. Many people had burns on their body, or suffered from severe nausea and headaches. Some of the people even died. Even worse, Trafigura did not admit to their wrong doings, and only paid for the damages made in nature. They never issued an apology saying that what they did was their fault, and they were sorry. How can a company like this one still be allowed to make money after they neglected the well being of people, and carelessly dumped toxic waste onto the

After the tragic explosion in Bhopal, India, due to Union Carbide’s chemical plant, many citizens suffered tragedies such as death and severe injuries due to the toxic gas that was released upon the explosion. When citizens of Bhopal decided to sue against the Union Carbide Corporation, they combined all individual lawsuits against the plant together, as well as exercising their forum non conveniens, which handed the lawsuit to Indian courts. Moving the court case to India benefitted the company because Indian courts are friendlier to defendants. After all the legal tools Union Carbide used, they were able to use the Indian government to their advantage and enter into a settlement which was just $470 million in damages paid to the government (leaving victims with little to nothing) for a potentially billion dollar lawsuit if the lawsuit occurred in the United States. Union Carbide’s actions are unethical in the eyes of most citizens, even though the company was trying to avoid the downfall of their business.

It is 2017. In an era of globalisation with a worldwide population totalling over 7 billion, colossal multinational companies have become entrenched in prevailing society, with their daily operations impacting the lives of millions of people. This has made the role of ethics and ethical business practice crucial to the goals of sustainable development and the preservation of social order. The ExxonMobil climate change controversy will examine a case where complex ethical decisions were made, with the potential for staggering ramifications on a global scale. This case study highlights the vital importance of stringent adherence to business ethics by transitional businesses but also the ambiguity that comes with ethical interpretation.