Ecolex Logo
El portal del
derecho ambiental
Resultados de la búsqueda » Jurisprudencia

Proton Industries

País/Territorio
Suecia
Tipo de la corte
Nacional - corte superior
Fecha
Jun 26, 2013
Fuente
UNEP, InforMEA
Nombre del tribunal
Mark- och miljööverdomstolen
Sede de la corte
Stockholm
Número de referencia
M 11429-12
Idioma
Sueco
Materia
Cuestiones jurídicas
Resumen

The case concerned the responsibility for a parent company for actions by a subsidiary causing environmental damage.

A subsidiary, Proton Finishing Ekenässjön AB, a fully owned subsidiary of Proton Industries AB, was liquidated, but had during its period of operation polluted a dam with process water that had not been adequately treated before emitted into the dam and a nearby forest area. The dam showed higher levels of nickel, zinc and other metals.

The County Administrative Board meant that the parent company should, as the subsidiary was liquidated, take responsibility for the cleanup and after treatment of the dam. They assessed that the parent company, owning all shares of the subsidiary had a possibility of affecting the operations of the subsidiary. The parent company had also supported the subsidiary with substantive intra-group transfers.

The Land and Environment Court of Appeal stated that the a company carrying out operations leading to pollution are responsible for the after treatment in accordance with chapter 10 section 2 of the Environmental Code. There is no provision in environmental law lifting the corporate veil, however, the definition of who can be regarded as the operator, and therefore the responsible party, is wide and not limited to one company of individual. A company that is deemed to exercise actual control over the operations can be seen as the responsible operator. Only the fact that a parent company owns the company responsible for the polluting operations is not enough to make the parent company responsible for after treatment, but for example a subsidiary’s dependence on resources from the parent company can constitute such a link that the parent company is responsible.

On the basis of this, the Land and Environment Court of Appeal concluded that the parent company, Proton Industries AB was responsible for the after treatment of the dam polluted by its subsidiary.

 

Texto completo
M 11429-12.pdf