Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.

E390990

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. is a landmark 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the extraterritorial application of the Alien Tort Statute in human rights lawsuits against corporations for conduct occurring abroad.

All labels observed (2)

Label Occurrences
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. canonical 2
Kiobel 1

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (50)

Predicate Object
instanceOf Alien Tort Statute case ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
human rights case ⓘ
areaOfLaw Alien Tort Statute ⓘ
federal jurisdiction ⓘ
international human rights law ⓘ
arguedDate 2011-10-01 ⓘ
chiefJusticeAtDecision John G. Roberts, Jr. ⓘ
linked to: John G. Roberts Jr.
citation 569 U.S. 108 (2013) ⓘ
concurrenceBy Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ
Clarence Thomas ⓘ
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. ⓘ
linked to: Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
concurrenceJoinedBy Elena Kagan ⓘ
Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ
Sonia Sotomayor ⓘ
countryOfCourt United States ⓘ
court Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate 2013-04-17 ⓘ
defendant Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. ⓘ
linked to: Royal Dutch Shell

Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria, Ltd. ⓘ
linked to: Shell Nigeria

Shell Transport and Trading Company, p.l.c. ⓘ
docketNumber 10-1491 ⓘ
fullName Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. ⓘ
holding Claims under the Alien Tort Statute must sufficiently touch and concern the territory of the United States to displace the presumption against extraterritoriality. ⓘ
The Alien Tort Statute does not generally provide jurisdiction for suits based on conduct occurring entirely in foreign territory. ⓘ
The presumption against extraterritoriality applies to claims under the Alien Tort Statute. ⓘ
impact Established the "touch and concern" test for ATS claims involving foreign conduct. ⓘ
Significantly limited the use of the Alien Tort Statute for human rights lawsuits based on foreign conduct. ⓘ
issue Whether and under what circumstances the Alien Tort Statute allows courts to recognize causes of action for violations of international law occurring within the territory of a sovereign other than the United States. ⓘ
Whether corporations can be held liable under the Alien Tort Statute for violations of international law. ⓘ
lowerCourt United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ⓘ
lowerCourtHolding The Alien Tort Statute does not confer jurisdiction over claims against corporations for violations of customary international law. ⓘ
majorityJoinedBy Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ
Antonin Scalia ⓘ
Clarence Thomas ⓘ
Elena Kagan ⓘ
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. ⓘ
linked to: Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Sonia Sotomayor ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy John G. Roberts, Jr. ⓘ
linked to: John G. Roberts Jr.
originatingCountryOfClaims Nigeria ⓘ
plaintiff Esther Kiobel ⓘ
other Nigerian nationals ⓘ
rearguedDate 2012-10-01 ⓘ
result Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. ⓘ
shortName Kiobel ⓘ
statuteCitation 28 U.S.C. § 1350 ⓘ
statuteInterpreted Alien Tort Statute ⓘ
topic corporate liability for human rights violations ⓘ
extraterritoriality ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (3)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

October Term 2012 → includesCase → Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. ⓘ
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. → fullName → Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. ⓘ
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. → shortName → Kiobel ⓘ
linked to: Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.