Essay Preview: Ucil
Report this essay
Litigation:
Feb 1989- Supreme Court of India directed UCL & UCIL to pay $ 470 million in full settlement of the case.
The settlement was affirmed by the Indian Supreme Court, which described it as “just, equitable and reasonable.” The money was promptly paid to the Govt of India by UCC & UCIL.
A lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in 1999 asserting claims for personal injuries and property damage arising out the Bhopal gas disaster was dismissed, and all subsequent appeals in the case have upheld the dismissal.
Another case, filed in November 2004, and making similar claims, has been dismissed at several levels, but remains under appeal with the Second Circuit Court in New York.
A third case, filed in March 2007, and making similar claims as well, has been stayed pending the resolution of the 2004 case.
1994
UCC sold its 50.9% share to Mc. Leod Russell of Calcutta. UCIL was renamed as EIIL
1998
Govt. of Madhya Pradesh took over responsibility of the site
What exactly happened?
Morning December 3, 1984, Tank 610 holding 43 tones of MIC overheated and released toxic MIC which, being heavier than air, rolled along the ground through the surrounding streets.
A large volume of water had apparently been introduced into tank 610 holding MIC. This caused a chemical reaction that forced the pressure release valve to open and allowed the gas to leak. A committee of experts working on behalf of the Indian government conducted its own investigation and reached the same conclusion.
An independent investigation by engineering consulting firm Arthur D. Little determined that the water could only have been introduced into the tank deliberately, since process safety systems — in place and operational — would have prevented water from entering the tank by accident and the accident was caused by an employee sabotage.
Blaming UCC
Trade Environmental Database (TED) Case Studies pointed to “serious communication