Observations in light of the decision in Nestle, Inc. v. Doe– seeking compensation for victims of human rights abuses at work

The paper outlines the possibility of protecting workers' rights under the existing Alien Tort Statute (ATS) in US federal law. The background to the comments on the ATS is the Nestle, Inc. v. Doe decision in 2021, which has been described as "closing the window of hope" that had been attached to the possibility of bringing claims against transnational corporations for failing to respect fundamental rights at work. Undoubtedly, the ruling itself was a major disappointment for many human rights and labour rights campaigners and activists. However, the judgment (mainly because of its complex reasoning and dissenting opinions) has provoked a reaction in the form of proposals for new legislative solutions, and it is possible that it will become the seed from which a new, useful tool for the realisation of human rights at work will grow. The paper addresses the question of which work-related rules can be considered part of 'customary international law'.

Bibliografia/References

Bibliografia/References Choudhury, B. (2005). Beyond the Alien Tort Claims Act: Alternative Approaches to Attributing Liability to Corporations for Extraterritorial Abuses, Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 26.

Curtis, A. Bradley (2002). The Alien Tort Statute and Article III, Virginia Journal of International Law, 42, 587–648.

Diskin, D. (2005). The Historical and Modern Foundations for Aiding and Abetting Liability under the Alien Tort Statute, Arizona Law Review, 47.

Downey, E. (2019). Modern– Day Pirates: Why Domestic Parent Corporations Should be Liable Under the Alien Tort Statute for Violations of Workers' Rights Within Global Supply Chains, American University Law Review, 68, 5, 1933–1979.

Ellis, T. J. (2024). The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the Alien Tort Statute, UIC Law Review, 57, 4, 863–890.

Giannini, T. R. (2022). Living with History: Will the Alien Tort Statute Become a Badge of Shame or Badge of Honor? The Yale Law Journal Forum, 814– 843.

Kilarski, W. (2020), Korporacje międzynarodowe jako podmiot (?) międzynarodowego prawa praw człowieka, Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, Przegląd Prawa i Administracji CXX(1).

Koebele, M. (2009). Corporate Responsibility under the Alien Tort Statute. Enforcement of International Law through US Torts Law, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, Boston.

Kurowski, W. (2017). Stosunek pracy wynikający z umowy w prawie prywatnym międzynarodowym. C.H.Beck.

Mundlak, G. (2009). De-Territorializing Labor Law, Law&Ethics of Human Rights, 3 (2).

Petch, C. (2022). What Remains of the Alien Tort Statute after Nestlé USA Inc. v Doe? Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 42, 3, 397–421.

Schabs, W. A. (2021). The Customary International Law of Human Rights, Oxford University Press.

Staubach, P. G. (2018). The Rule of Unwritten International Law Customary Law, General Principles, and World Order, Routledge.

Szymanski, Ch. (2022). The Window Closes: Nestle, Inc. v. Doe and the Lost Promise of the U.S. Alien Tort Statute as a Means of Enforcing International Labor Law, Diritti Lavori Mercati International, 1.

Żankiewicz, M. (2010). Problem odpowiedzialności korporacji wielonarodowych w prawie międzynarodowym za naruszenie praw człowieka, Revista Critica de Historia de las Relaciones Laborales y de la Politica Social, 1–2, 57–81.