Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

As we’ve learned from the endlessly unfolding environmental contamination litigation against Chevron in Ecuador, suits attempting to hold multinational companies responsible for pollution abroad are bitterly contested. A case filed by the Philippine province of Marinduque against the mining company Barrick Gold is no exception. On Tuesday the Filipinos scored a victory when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court ruling that had dismissed the case on forum non conveniens grounds. The appeals court ordered that the case be sent back to Nevada state court, where it was originally filed. It was a big win for Marinduque and its three law firms: Diamond McCarthy, Snell & Wilmer and Zambrano & Gruba of Manila. The province’s suit, first filed in 2005, alleges that 30 years of mining operations by a Barrick predecessor caused widespread health, environmental and economic damages in Marinduque, an island province. In a particularly juicy part of the complaint, the province claims that former Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos eased environmental restrictions on the Barrick predecessor in exchange for a stake in the company. Barrick succeeded in removing the suit to federal court, where Reno federal district court judge Brian Sandoval — who is now a Republican candidate for governor of Nevada — ruled that it was better suited for a court in Canada. In reversing Judge Sandoval’s decision, the appellate court found he did not have subject-matter jurisdiction over the suit, which the 9th Circuit said had been improperly removed to federal court. Jim McCarthy of Diamond McCarthy argued the 9th Circuit appeal for Marinduque. His partner Skip Scott said in a statement: “You cannot come away from Marinduque without being deeply moved and incensed by the sheer devastation and callous disregard for life and property. The people there deserve justice. Now the door is open to pursue justice for Marinduque in the Nevada state court.” Barrick is represented by Morris Pickering & Peterson and Howrey. Messages left with Howrey’s Jerrold Ganzfried, who argued the appeal, and a Barrick spokesman were not returned by press time.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.